2015 (2) TMI 1112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er : Navin Sinha, ACJ.]. - We have heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent. 2. The present appeal arises from order dated 22-4-2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Service Tax Appeal No. 567 of 2006. 3. The Tribunal held that the respondent shall be deemed to be an output serv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n operation. The service tax paid by the respondent as a deemed output service provider is for the period prior to 5-3-2004. The Tribunal erred in giving retrospective effect to Rule 2(p). The provision has not been made retrospective in operation. If for any reason the respondent was subsequently held not liable to pay Service Tax as a deemed output service provider, its remedy for the same by wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ider under Rule 2(p) of the Rules. 7. We have considered the submissions on behalf of the parties. 8. It is an undisputed position that prior to 5-3-2004 the respondent was not an output service provider. It became an output service provider subsequent to that date after it entered into a MOU with M/s. Vallab Steels Ltd. for rendering output service. If prior to the same, the Responden....