TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 619
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er. By the impugned order, out of total amount of Rs. 61 lakhs demanded in the show cause notice, the Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand of about Rs. 34 lakhs on various grounds and confirmed the balance demand to the extent of Rs. 26 lakhs. The assessee is challenging the confirmation of Service Tax demand of around Rs. 26 lakhs whereas the Revenue is in appeal against a portion of the demand dropped by the Adjudicating Authority. Part of the Revenue appeal also is against the ground on which the amount of Rs. 26 lakhs has been confirmed. 2. With the above background, we heard Shri O.P. Agarwal, ld. C.A. appearing for the assessee and Sh. Amresh Jain, ld. AR for the Revenue. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08-09 4,26,295/- f Transportation and unloading of cement bags from railway wagon to department store. Cargo Handling GTA 2008-09 2008-09 32,843/- 16,421/- Total 26,02,734/- Ld. Consultant submitted that in respect of Sl. No. a, b, c, & e of the table above, the classification of the activity was proposed under CICS in the show cause notice whereas the Adjudicating Authority has confirmed such demand under Works Contract Service (WCS). He argued that such confirmation is travelling beyond the show cause notice and hence not sustainable. In this regard, he relied on the Tribunal decision in the case of Ashish Ramesh Dasarwar vs. CCE&ST, Nagpur- 2017-TIO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uction activities carried out by the assessee during the period 01.04.2008 to 31.03.2009. Out of the total Service Tax demanded in the show cause notice amounting to Rs. 61,01,025/-, the Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand to the extent of about Rs. 34 lakhs and confirmed the balance amount. The assessee has challenged a part of the Service tax confirmed against him. They are not disputing the liability to the extent of Rs. 9,11,262/- in respect of the work carried out to RVUN towards rerouting of existing raw water pipelines. In respect of rest of the confirmation of Service tax demand in the impugned order, the main ground for challenge is that the show cause noticed as proposed demand of Service tax under the category of CICS where....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... raised on amount received towards transportation and unloading of cement bags from Railway wagon. In para 26 and 27(i) of the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority has classified the services under Transport of Goods by Road Service whereas the show cause notice had proposed classification of the same under Cargo Handling Services. It has been held that the trucks which were used for transportation of the goods were belonging to service recipient. The Revenue in their appeal has challenged this finding with the argument that in the absence of any record evidencing the ownership of the trucks, the service ought to have been classified under Cargo Handling service. The assessee has also challenged the similar finding recorded by the ....