2018 (3) TMI 1009

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appellant Shri. G.S. Dhiilon, AR- for the respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand of service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Service under reverse charge mechanism was confirmed for the period April  2006 to March  2008 on the premise that the appellant did not get registered themselves under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wners Association V. Union of India, 2009 (13) STR 235 (Bom.) which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2010 (17) STR J57 (SC) held that for the period prior to 18.04.2006, there was no provisions to recover service tax under reverse charges mechanism, therefore, the said demand was dropped. But for the period post 18.04.2006 to 31.03.2008, demand of service tax was confirmed a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ners ltd. reported in 2017 (11) TMI 155- Cestat Chandigarh. 4. On the other hand the ld. AR relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Central Power Research Institute reported in 2017 (6) GSTL 42 (Tri. Del.) and Insurance  & Provident Fund Department reported in 2001 (132) ELT 726 (Tri. Del.) to say that as the appellant has  not declared the payment of commission to thei....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2006 and the demands in respect of the period prior to 18.04.2006 is set aside. it is also seen that part of the demand in the above appeals fall outside the normal period. The issue being interpretational and as divergent views were prevailing during that period, we hold that the extended period is not invokable. At this point, learned counsel submits that the period involved in the said appeal ....