2015 (1) TMI 225

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of 33% of the billed amount. So splitting 33% of the billed amount to value and tax appears to be proper rather than splitting the entire value of the project including value of materials into consideration for service and tax and then giving abatement. Further, assessees who pay tax first applies abatement, arrive at 33% of value and calculate Service Tax on it. The method adopted by appellant w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd the assessable value has to be arrived at on that basis. There is a dispute between the Revenue and the appellant in the manner of calculation of Service Tax. Revenue argues that first cum-tax benefit should be granted and thereafter abatement should be allowed whereas the appellant argues that first abatement should be granted and the remaining part should be treated as cum-tax value. 2. We .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X