Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical) Final Order No. 52945/2014 Per Justice G. Raghuram: The Commissioner (Appeals) Meerut-I by the impugned order dated 16.08.2007 dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant assessee against the adjudication order dated 27.10.2006 of the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Ghaziabad. The primary Authority confirmed (for the period 2002-03) service tax liability of Rs. 25,92,500/- apart from interest and penalties on the basis that the appellant had provided Consulting Engineer service to M/s Hero Global Designs Pvt. Limited (Hero) and received consideration of Rs. 7,26,50,000/- for rendition of the taxable service.
2. Under an agreement dated 20.06.2002 between the appellant and M/s Hero, appellant provided by CAD/CAM, designs for manufacture and maintenance of component assemblies for motor vehicles. Whether this activity falls within the ambit of Consulting Engineer service defined in Section 65(31) read with Section 65 (105)(g) of the Finance Act, 1994 is the issue that falls for consideration. The authorities below concluded that it does. The appellant contests the concurrent findings.
3. We notice that the very issue stands concluded by the judgment of the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in Kinetic Engineering Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune-I 2012 (25) STR 26 (Tri. Mumbai), a decision approved by the Bombay High Court in Commissioner vs. Kinetic Engineering Ltd. -2013 (30) STR J18 (Bom.). The Tribunal reiterated this principle spelt out in its decision in Kinetic Engineering Ltd., in CST, Mumbai vs. Leibert Corporation -214 (33) STR 161 (Tri. Mumbai). There is no contest that the decisions of this Tribunal conclude the issue in favour of the appellant-assessee in the present appeal.
3. We therefore allow the appeal. The impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) Meerut-I dated 16.08.2007 is quashed. There shall however be no order as to costs. (Justice G. Raghuram) President (R. K. Singh) Member (Technical) Pant