9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o finding either in the show-cause notice or in the adjudication order that the value of materials and ATF shown in the invoice does not reflect the actual position but has been indicated on a notional basis. Thus, we find on our own verification of a few invoices as well as the show-cause notice and the order-in-original, clearly show that in this case the materials and the ATF value were shown separately and repair/service cost was shown separately. Further the learned counsel also submits that the appellants have not availed CENVAT credit. Therefore, we see that the appellant has fulfilled the conditions required to be fulfilled for availing the benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 - Decided in favour of assessee. - App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l and what was delivered to the client was repairs and not spare parts. The parts of materials were charged separately and therefore excludable. He submits that in view of the fact that in respect of the very same appellant for a different periods, this Tribunal had already passed orders in their favour and the invoices which have been supplied along with memorandum of appeal shows clearly that there was sale of materials in ATF and reflected separately and therefore as per Notification No.12/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003, the value of the goods sold cannot be included. 3. The learned AR on the other hand relies upon the decision in the case of Safety Retreading Company (P) Ltd. vs. CCE: 2012 (26) S.T.R. 225 (Tri.-Chennai) to submit that the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hown separately and repair/service cost was shown separately. Further the learned counsel also submits that the appellants have not availed CENVAT credit. Therefore, we see that the appellant has fulfilled the conditions required to be fulfilled for availing the benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003. We also take note of the fact that on the same activity for different periods, this Tribunal has already allowed the appeal in two cases. As regards the decision cited by the learned AR above in Safety Retreading Co. wherein according to the findings, the invoices unilaterally raised by the appellant indicated the break-up without substantiating the amount attributable to the value of goods supplied and therefore it was viewed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
