9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... separate worksheets showing invoice numbers, date and amount involved in respect of each issue separately. Thereafter they should produce evidence which they are claiming to be having. Such evidences along with detailed submissions should be submitted to the adjudicating authority, thereafter the adjudicating authority shall give personal hearing and issue a speaking order which will enable the Tribunal to decide on grievance if any without further remand to lower authority, appeal are disposed of X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s under. Issue No. Issue Involved Tax Involved (Rs. Lakhs) I. Interest Demanded on tax due for advance amounts received from the clients prior to 16-6-2005 when amendment was made in the statute to tax advance received. 1 II. Tax Demanded on Bills raised but amounts not received 28 III. Tax demanded on value of goods supplied for executing their services 14 IV. Tax demanded on amounts incurred by the Appellant on behalf of the clients and reimbursed by the clients 36 Total 79 3. On Issue-I the counsel argues that before 16-6-2005 there was no liability to pay service tax on advances received for executing a service. The requirement was that every assessee had to pay tax when such advances were adjusted for services ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority to give a finding, when this case is considered afresh. 4. The Appellant also has a plea that in the case of some contracts the Appellant was only a sub-contractor and the service tax should be demanded from the main contractor who had entered into contract with the consumer of the service. The Appellant relies on the decision of the Tribunal in BBR (India) Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore-III- 2006 (4) S.T.R. 269 in this regard. 5. The ld. DR is handicapped in making proper representations because of lack of specific findings by adjudicating authority on Issues II, III and IV in the impugned order. 6. After hearing arguments on both sides we are convinced that the demands confirmed by the impugned order cannot be enforced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iture had not been incurred by the noticee as a pure agent but was related and necessary for providing services". 9. The basis for statement that law is settled is not explained. The issue has not been examined with reference to Rule 5(2) of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. Since Issue-III and Issue-IV have not been dealt with properly, we consider it necessary to send the case back to the adjudicating authority. 10. In the circumstances we set aside the Order-in-Original and remit the matter to the adjudicating authority keeping all issues, both factual and legal, open. The de novo order should among other issues, if any, state,- (i) Evidence, if any, submitted by the Appellant showing amounts billed but again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
