9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (3) TMI 921X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. ORDER Service tax of Rs. 1,52,17,562/- with interest as applicable has been demanded and penalty equal to the service tax has been imposed under Sections 76&78 of Finance Act, 1994. The service tax demand has been confirmed on the ground that the appellants have claimed abatement in terms of exemption notification but have not included the value of steel supplied by the service r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Cemex Engineers v. CST Cochin reported in 2010 (17) S.T.R. 534 (Tribunal) = 2009-TIOL-2208-CESTAT-BANG had held that the cost of the material supplied by the service receiver need not be included whereas this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Jaihind Projects Ltd. v. CST, Ahmedabad reported in 2010 (18) S.T.R. 650 (Tri. - Ahmd.) = 2010-TIOL-124-CESTAT-AHM decided that the value of the goods supplied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the arguments advanced by the learned SDR, even though we feel prima facie matter has to be remanded to Commissioner since the order of the Commissioner is not clear as to the category of service provided by the appellant and the notification under which they are eligible for abatement, we refrain from doing so. Further, the appellant has also compounded the problem by paying the service t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
