2014 (1) TMI 453

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h the Notification No. 15/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004 Revenue intended taxation by value addition, but the assess refuted the same. Adjudicating authority appears to have rightly decided the issue against the assessee following taxation of incremental value principle. In sofar as taxing of the advance is concerned, there is no ambiguity in the law. Law prescribes that the consideration received bef .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s that the assessee is abusing process of law to enjoy the benefit of interim order. Revenue being prejudiced the appeal is decided by this order ex parte. Ld. Adjudicating Authority framed following 5 issues:- (i) Whether the noticee was entitled to abatement of 67% from the value of commercial or industrial construction service under Notification No. 15/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004, even wit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ainst the assessee following taxation of incremental value principle. In sofar as taxing of the advance is concerned, there is no ambiguity in the law. Law prescribes that the consideration received before, during and after providing of taxable service should enter into the net of the service tax. Therefore, that issue also goes against the assessee. 4. The third issue of claim was examined by t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X