(1.) Service tax of Rs. 2,68,589/ - has been demanded from the appellants in respect of Repairs and Maintenance Service provided by them to their customers during 1997 -98 to 2001 -02 as per the impugned order. Penal -lies have also been imposed on them. It is submitted by ld. Counsel for the appellants that it was only with effect from 1 -7 -2003 that the above service was specified for service tax. It is further submitted that the lower authorities have demanded service tax on the above services for the aforesaid period of dispute by treating the service as Engineering Consultancy Service. Ld. Counsel has argued that Repairs and Maintenance Service was not liable to be placed under Engineering Consultancy Service. He has, in this connection, relied on the Tribunal's decision in Rolls Royce Indus. Power (I) Ltd. v. CCE, Vishakhapatnam [2004 (171) E.L.T. 189 (Tri. - Del.)]. I have heard ld. SDR also. It appears that the appellants have a strong prima facie case in view of the cited case law. Hence waiver of pre -deposit and stay of recovery are allowed in respect of the aforesaid amount of service tax.
(2.) In Appeal No. S/62/2004, the challenge is against a demand of service tax of Rs. 7,20,452/ - from the appellants for the period 7 -7 -1997 to 28 -2 -2002. The demand is on the service of calibration of equipments. The appellants' case, made out today by their Counsel, is that this service is not an Engineering Consultancy Service. Their claim is that the above service has been specified for the first time as 'Technical Inspection and Certification Service' with effect -from 1 -7 -2003 for the purpose of service tax. Prior to that date, the Department has treated the service as Engineering Consultancy Service for the purpose of recovery of tax. Ld. SDR has reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue, it appears to me that the appellants have a strong prima facie case in this case also. Therefore, waiver and stay are granted in respect of the aforesaid amounts of service tax and penalty.