COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. DCW LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Order No. 525 of 2006, dated 17-11-2006 read with Final Order No. 1484/2005, dated 10-11-2005 in Appeal No. S/ROM/9/2006 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,2006 1 STR 298 is being challenged in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. The crux of the case of both parties is that the respondent has been engaging in clearing and forwarding service. To put it in short, the respondent is a recipient of service. Under the said circumstances, the respondent is liable to pay service tax for the months of July and August, 1999 and due to that proceeding has been initiated. In the meanwhile, the respondent has paid the service tax as demanded by the Department and due to subsequent decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, appeal has been preferred before the Tax Appellate Tribunal, wherein, order of refund has been passed. Against the said order, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Commissioner of Central Excise as appellant.

(2.) The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that as per the decision, (Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited v. Union of India, 2006 3 STR 608), liability to pay service tax has been shifted upon the service provided from 1-9-1999 as per Notification No. 7/99 dated 23-8-1999 and subsequently in the year 2000, amendments have been made in Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, wherein, it has been clearly stated that prior to 1-9-1999, the service tax has to be paid by the recipient and the service tax due from the respondent is related to months of July and August, 1999 and therefore, the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal so as to refund the tax paid by the respondent is erroneous.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has fairly conceded the decision reportedand subsequent Notification No. 7/99 and also amendments to Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act made in the year 2000.