9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no balances in their books of accounts - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Appeal No. ST/1695/2012 - Final Order No. A/31384/2017 - Dated:- 30-8-2017 - Mr. M. V. Ravindran, Member ( Judicial ) None for the Appellant Shri M. Chandra Bose, Addl. Commissiner/AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order Per : Mr. M. V. Ravindran ] 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 53/2012(H-IV)ST, dt. 19.03.2012. 2. None appeared for the appellant despite notice. The matter has been coming for disposal atleast 3 times and there is no representation from appellant. Since the appeal is of 2012, I take up the same for disposal in the absence of any representation from appellant. 3. Heard Ld. DR and perused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... balance sheet before the Tribunal or before the lower authorities. 8. In my view, findings of the first appellate authority on the issue are very detailed one and I reproduce the same: I observe that the lower authority in the impugned order held that, in order to verify the correctness of the taxable value adopted by appellant as per the agreement, the financial records have been called for and particularly asked for the treatment of service tax paid on input service in their books of accounts. The appellant have submitted their annual reports for the year 2009-10 and 2010-11 and a letter dated 21.11.2011 wherein they have stated that, they have debited P L account for all services taxes paid and the same was included in the export ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are rightly eligible to avail credit under Rule 3 of CCR. So far as AS2 is concerned, i their books of account, they are only dealing with valuation of closing working progress and not with iput and input service valuations. With regard to lower authority s allegation that they had availed double benefit by way of realizing amount of service tax from the overeas client and reducing profit margin in the P L account and further held that appellant attempted to avail third benefit by filing refund claim, it is submitted that as per CBEC circular No. 783/2004 dated 28.04.2004, input credit cannot be denied. They have already paid more income tax and there is no scope for double benefit as alleged by the lower authority. I observe that as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
