9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant. Shri R. Nagar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. - Appellant is engaged in providing service of retreading of old tyres. There is no dispute that this activity between liable for service tax which affects from 16-6-05. On 7-12-05, the officers visited the appellants premises carried out a search and recorded statements and took up investigation. On 13-12-05 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from 1-10-05 to 31-3-07. This show cause notice also demanded service tax for the differential amount between the labour charges and the actual amount collected by the appellant. In this case also suppression of fact was invoked and penalty was proposed. After adjudication and appellate proceedings culminated in confirmation of the demand, rejection of the request of the appellant for benefit of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of the department that the activity undertaken by the appellant was liable to service tax in the previous year. The Commissioner has failed to take note of this aspect. Learned DR also supported the Commissioner's observation that gross value of turn over is required to be taken. However, we find that the Commissioner has not discussed and considered the particular clause namely 2(viii) of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in the invoices is eligible for abatement under Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. The learned advocate fairly agrees that these decisions were not cited before the learned Commissioner. Therefore we consider it appropriate that this issue is to be remanded for consideration. We also take note of the fact that once all issues are considered and if they go in their favour, the total amount paid by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
