2025 (7) TMI 1457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 10th August 2015 ] of Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Nagpur, it is the alleged rendering of 'scientific and technical consultancy service' between 2007-08 and 2011-12 without discharging liability of Rs.8,25,432 on consideration of Rs.72,38,250 that is impugned before us. The order of the original authority, confirming the liability under section 73 of Finance Act, 1994, along with appropriate interest under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994, besides imposing penalties under section 75, 76 (limited to the dues upto the date of incorporation of mutual exclusivity in section 78) and 78 of Finance Act, 1994, was upheld in the impugned order leading to this proceeding before us. 2. In the context of the disp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 of Finance Act, 1994 precluded invoking of section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 and the cases relied upon by the original authority for simultaneous imposition of penalty till 10th May 2008, when the two were rendered mutually exclusive, pertains to the period before. The non-existence of such proviso at some time in the past cannot be deemed to be erasure of such restriction when the show cause notice came to be issued. Hence, penalty under section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 imposed by the original authority is without authority of law. The adjudication order has undertaken elaborate discussion on the justification for imposition of penalties under section 76, 77and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 without discussion of the merit of the levy and only on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rtners as that has not been highlighted by the lower authorities despite relevance for deciding on the aspect of contributory recoveries that is so essential to 'joint venture' model of undertaking contractual performance and, particularly, in extraction of 'natural resource' that is public asset. The conclusions from the invoices submitted on behalf of appellant are less than forthcoming on this aspect. The purported recipient of the disputed 'service', though essential to determination of coverage under the taxable entry, has not been identified in the impugned order. The nature of service rendered has been pre-supposed on the foundation of billings and bookings. That invoices invoices have been raised on one of the partners in the joint ....