TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1077
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect of wells located beyond and within 12 nautical miles from India landmass. Logs recorded by the appellant were either delivered directly to the E & P Companies or used for data analysis at the Data Processing Centre located in Mumbai. As the appellant was not paying service tax in respect of processing activities undertaken by it, show cause notice dated April 23, 2010 was issued proposing demand of service tax on data analysis services under the category of 'Survey and Exploration of Mineral, Oil & Gas Services' under Section 65(104a) read with section 65(105)(zzv) of the Act. By the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of service tax:- i). Under the category of 'Technical Testing and Analysis Services' for the period prior to May 31, 2007; and ii). Under the category of 'Mining Services' with effect from June 1, 2007. Hence, the present appeal has been filed before this Tribunal. 3. Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, the learned Counsel for the appellant commenced arguments, restricting it to the preliminary issue that the impugned order is unsustainable for the simple reason that the adjudicating order has traversed beyond the scope of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....adiction, the learned Counsel has read through the contents of the impugned order classifying the services under different heading than what was proposed in the show cause notice, which is quoted below:- 59. Further, I do not find it prudent to discuss further the classification of said services under the taxable category of "Survey and exploration services" as alleged in the present SCN by the DGCEL, Pune in as much as the same stand adjudicated by the Commissioner Adjudication Service Tax, Delhi discussed supra and holding the classification of the said services under the taxable category of "Technical testing and analysis services" which were made taxable w.e.f. 1.07.03. Further this order has also been accepted by the department in review. Moreover, I also agree with the findings of Commissioner Adjudication Service Tax Delhi as far as classification of the said services under the taxable category of "Technical Testing & Analysis" services is-concerned. Accordingly, data services provided by the noticee in respect of wells situated outside 12NM of Indian offshore detailed in the SCN merit classification under "Technical Testing & Analysis" services and not under "Surve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 'Mining Service' because the appellant itself classified the services as Mining Service in their ST3 Returns and paid service tax under that category. 6. There cannot be any quarrel with the settled principle of law that the Adjudicating Authority cannot go beyond the proposal made in the show cause notice. Considering the proposed classification in the SCN under the category of 'Survey and Exploration of Mineral, Oil, and Gas Service', the classification made by the Adjudicating Authority under 'Technical Testing and Analysis Services' and 'Mining Services' is beyond the scope of the show cause notice in as much no such allegation has been made therein. We completely agree with the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant, which have been duly supported by series of decisions, which we may take note of. 7. We would first refer to the decision of the Apex Court in Hindustan Polymers Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Guntur [1999 (106) ELT 12 (SC)], which aptly applies in the present case in view of the rebuttal made by the learned Special Counsel herein. In that case since the show cause notice proposed classification under the residuary Tariff Item 68 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Apex Court held that the Department cannot travel beyond the show cause notice. 10. In Precision Rubber Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2016 (334) ELT 577 (SC)], the Apex Court following the settled principle enunciated in Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur versus Ballarpur Industries Ltd. [2007 (215) ELT 489 (SC)] , that show cause notice is the foundation in any proceedings for levy and recovery of duty, penalty and interest, held that no new case could have been set-up or decided contrary to show cause notice. 11. The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Delhi Duty Free Services Private Ltd versus Commissioner CGST Division, Delhi South Commissionerate [2019 (8) TMI 1489-CESTAT- New Delhi] specifically dealt with the issue as to whether he adjudicating authority or the appellate authority can go beyond the issue raised in the SCN. In that case, SCN was issued on the ground of limitation under Section 11 B of the Excise Act, but the Commissioner instead of examining the limited issue went beyond the SCN to the extent of observing that it was necessary for the adjudicating authority to examine whether the supply by the appellant qualifies as an 'e....