9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1000X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant, machinery or equipment - Held that:- col.3 of the table appended to Notification No. 1/2006-ST providing for 67%, covers erection commissioning or installation under a contract for supplying a plant, machinery equipment and also erection, commissioning or installation of such plant, machinery or equipment. Thus, it covers erection, commissioning or installation of plant machinery and equipme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the material in the assessable value before claiming abatement is not without basis. Thus, prima facie, the appellant has a fairly strong case in its favour and therefore deserves complete waiver of pre-deposit. - Decided in favour of appellant - Service Tax Stay Application No.ST/S/61535/2013-ST [DB] in Service Tax Appeal No.ST/60452/2013-ST [DB] - Stay Order No. 50477/2016 - Dated:- 2-5-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Advocate for the appellant pleaded that the appellant is very much covered under the definition of erection, commissioning and installation service and S. 65 (39a) (ii) (d) specifically mentions thermal insulation as part of the E.C.I.S. 2. Ld. D.R. on the other hand states that the exemption Notification No.1/2006-ST provides 67% abatement only when supply of plant, machinery equipment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... installation service. 33 A reading of the above quoted provision of Notification No.1/2006-ST would prima facie tend to show that ld. D.R. seems to have an arguable point that as there is no supply of the plant, machinery or equipment, 67% abatement is not admissible. However, a careful reading of Col.3 quoted above would tend to indicate that it covers erection c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inery or equipment but also value of parts and other material sold is to be included in the assessable value for the purpose of abatement. In addition, prima facie the appellants contention that the demand is time barred because there was no willful misstatement of suppression of facts and the appellant had included the value of the material in the assessable value before claiming abatement is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
