9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 704X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g of crushing charges. Hence, it is not tenable to hold that the crushing charges are influenced by the possible emergence of iron ore fines and its additional value to the appellant - The Revenue has no evidence to support the allegation that the value of iron ore fines likely to emerge during the crushing operation have impacted the crushing charges and, as such, are to be considered as additional consideration for taxable service. In the absence of any indication to that effect, we are not in agreement with the proposal that there is a non-monetary consideration in the form of iron ore fine influencing the crushing charges - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant which resulted in the impugned order. 2. The Original Authority held that the value of iron ore fines arising out of crushing operations and retained by the appellant should be added in the total consideration for calculating the service tax liability. He accordingly confirmed service tax liability of ₹ 75,98,749/- against the appellant. Penalties under Section 76, 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 were also imposed on the appellant. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant elaborated the grounds of appeal and emphasized, mainly, on the following points:- (a) the crushing charges are fixed before hand and the permissible loss during the operation is part of the contract with the customer; loss of 3 to 4% is agreed upon by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e form of iron ore fines generated during job work by the appellant cannot have any impact on the job charges collected by the appellant ; (e) the demand is also contested on the question of limitation as a generation of iron ore fine is captured in all their records and the Revenue had calculated demand based on records maintained by the appellant only. Accordingly, there is no case for invoking suppression etc. for demand of extended period. On the same ground, there is no basis for imposition of penalties on the appellant. 4. The learned AR reiterated the findings of the Original Authority. He submitted that iron ore fines retained by the appellant are having market value and over a period, they have accumulated substantial quantity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loss within agreed limits, are available with the appellant for their disposal. The question now is whether such value of iron ore fine should be added in the crushing charges for tax liability. We note admittedly the supplier of iron ore lumps had agreed to crushing charges fixed as per M.T. of lumps supplied. The ground loss also is pre-fixed. Now, at the time of issue of work order neither party is aware of the exact quantum of loss or possible accrual of iron ore fines for the appellant. In other words, the contingency of emergence of iron ore fines having some value, is not determinable at the time of fixing of crushing charges. Hence, it is not tenable to hold that the crushing charges are influenced by the possible emergence of iron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
