2020 (2) TMI 223

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uous. 2. We dispose off three appeals arising out of orders passed by Commissioner of Service Tax (Adjudication), Mumbai and Commissioner of Service - I, Mumbai. Show cause notice dated 16th October 2012 demanding service tax of Rs. 98,80,29,141/- for the period from 2008-09 to 2010-11 and show cause notice dated 7th January 2013 for the period 2011-12 demanding tax of Rs. 11,24,37,331/- for 'repair and maintenance service' rendered by offshore service providers that had not been subject to tax led to initiation of these proceedings which culminated in confirmation vide order-in-original no. 128-129/STC-I/SKS/13-14 dated 14th February 2014. It is the claim of the appellant that the liability does not arise as the services were received a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 65(105)(r) as recipient of 'management of business consultancy service' defined in section 65(65) of Finance Act, 1994. A further demand of Rs. 57,98,72,089/- for the period from 1st October 2005 to 31st March 2008 was sought to be recovered as recipient of 'management, maintenance or repair service' under section 65(105)(zzg) of Finance Act, 1994. All these demands were dropped in 03/ST/HAB/13-14 dated 21st May 2013 of Commissioner of Service Tax (Adjudication), Mumbai prompting Revenue to come before us. 5. Learned Special Counsel appearing for Revenue submits that the findings of the original authority had erred in coming to the conclusion that the allegation of classification of service and the quantification of tax evaded was not c....