2018 (5) TMI 826

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd Ms. Vibha Narang, Advocate for the Respondent: Mr.R.K. Maji, D.R. PER: S.K. MOHANTY This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 28.03.2015 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Bhopal. 2. In this case, the appellant is a joint venture company of M/s. National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. and Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. The appellant provides various s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. On appeal, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order, has upheld the adjudged demand confirmed against the appellant. 3. The ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant, at the outset, submits that the show cause notice has not properly bifurcated the services, which the appellant had provided to M/s. NTPC and that Service Tax liability had no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... we find that the activities of the appellant were discussed therein and it was held that the services provided by it are covered under the taxable category of services under management maintenance & repair, manpower recruitment and supply agency and cleaning activity. On the basis of the proposals made in the show cause notice, both the original as well as the lower appellate authorities have pro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....go back to the original authority for passing of fresh adjudication order, by addressing the issues, concerning the nature of activities provided by the appellant and their specific categorization under the respective heads of taxable service. The adjudicating authority should also quantify the proper demand in respect of the individual heads of service provided by the appellant. Further, the subm....