9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rges, then they will be entitled to benefit of N/N. 12/2001-ST, as amended - matter remanded to the Assistant Commissioner, who shall re-compute the tax liability, as per the directions given by this Tribunal - appeal allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eper". The refund was claimed for excess amount paid ₹ 11,70,051/-. The Joint Commissioner, Central Excise, in reply to the appellant stated- that since one of the conditions of Notification No.12/2001-ST, as amended is that assessee shall not avail the benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST (as amended by definition in Notification No.12/2004-ST). It was further stated that the request of appellant to avail benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST with retrospective effect cannot be granted as long as appellant is availing the benefit of Notification No.12/2001-ST. Further, stating that benefit is available under either of the Notification No.12/2001-ST or 12/2003-ST. Thereafter, the appellant filed a formal refund claim in the prescribe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... % and service tax had to be paid on 60% of the gross amount. Further, Notification No.12/2003-ST is a general notification, applicable to all services providing exemption, so much of the value of all taxable services, as is equal to the value of goods and materials sold by the service provider to the recipient of service from the service tax leviable thereon under Section 66 of the Act. Subject to condition that there is documentary proof specifically, indicating the value of the said goods and materials. It was also observed that the contention of the appellant that they did not opt for 100% exemption under Notification No.12/2001-ST is factually incorrect as the appellant had stopped paying service tax after the said notification came int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s inclusive of catering charges, Notification No.12/2001 is applicable. 4. Heard the learned A.R. for revenue and perused the written submission, filed by the appellant as well as the case records. From perusal of the Order-in-Original, I find that the tax liability have not been computed, which was a basic requirement for deciding the refund claim of the appellant. Although the Assistant Commissioner have observed in his order that there is requirement to calculate the tax liability but the same have not been done. Thus. there has been miscarriage of Justice. I further hold that under the facts and circumstances, the appellant will be entitled to benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST, if it is evident from their bills, the amount of mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
