9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant. Shri Amresh Jain, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard the ld. Counsel for the appellant and the ld. Authorized Representative for the respondent/ Revenue. At the interlocutory stage since the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in M/s. Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. v. C.S.T., Delhi reported in 2013 (32) S.T.R. 49 (Tri-LB) we dispose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t service. 3. The Larger Bench of this Tribunal in Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. (supra) interpreted the scope inter alia of Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. to mean that the value of free supplies by service recipients are not comprehended within the scope of "gross consideration received" and that the "Explanation" to the said Notification which explains that the gross amount charged shall include ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ope of levy of sales tax and Service Tax and allocation of legislative powers under our constitutional scheme, to the Union and the States, authorizing levy of Service Tax and sales tax/VAT, qua distinct and exclusive allocation of fields of legislation, under List-I and List-II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution; and after referring to several judgments of the Supreme Court including the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by approximation formulae instead of being subjected to detailed assessment and evaluation of the value of the goods, for exclusion of this component for levy of service tax; the exemption/abatement Notifications cannot be challenged as ultra vires the charging provisions of service tax legislation. The interpretation of Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. however did not fall for consideration by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
