2022 (7) TMI 1181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri. R. P Parekh, Superintendent ( Authorized Representative ) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing taxable services under the category of "Rent a Cab Operator" services as defined under Section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994. On the basis of CERA audit, it was observed that the appellant had submitted the annual ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Act and imposed penalties under Section 76 and 78 of the Finance Act. Being aggrieved by the order in original, the appellant preferred the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order upheld the order in original and set aside the appeal mainly on the ground that all the claim made by the appellant that the services provided by them are n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n for disposal on the basis of records. 3. We have heard Shri R P Parekh Learned Superintendent (Authorized Representative), who reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by Learned AR and perused the records. We find that the appellant from the adjudication stage till this appellate stage claimed that the demand is not sustainable on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n, we are of the view that without having documents on record, the claim of the appellant cannot be established regarding non taxability of the service. In this circumstances and in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that one opportunity can be given to the appellant to present their case before the adjudicating authority and to submit all the documents whereby the claim of the ap....