9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er passed by learned Commissioner as revisional authority, the appellants did not get the benefit of abatement of cost of certain components/parts of elevators from the gross amount received by them from their customers under Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC) during the period July to December, 2003. The present appeal is for getting such benefit under Notification No. 12/2003-S.T., dated 20-6-200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On the other hand, learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the basic principle underlying the above abatement is that any Service Tax shall not be levied on goods on which Sales Tax was paid, the two taxes being mutually exclusive. It is submitted that Sales Tax was paid by the appellants on the components and parts replaced by them in the course of repairs and maintenance of the customer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount of differential Service Tax demanded by the revisional authority is only Rs. 1,48,213/- which is the tax being levied on the cost of components/parts of elevators, supplied by the appellants to their customers under AMCs. The AMC mentions only the gross amount chargeable from customer and did not specify the cost of components/parts required for replacements. Clause 6.6 of the AMC provide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght of this principle while interpreting Notification No. 12/2003-ST ibid. 3. On the whole, the issue arising in this case is extremely argueable. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to grant waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the small amount of Service Tax demanded by the Commissioner. Accordingly, there will be-waiver of pre-deposit and Stay of recovery as prayed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
