9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h it was concluded that for their service contracts the percentage value of the goods and material is 50% - further, there has not been any substantial reasons and evidences to counter the contents of the documentary proof submitted in terms of the N/N. 12/2003-S.T. giving necessary abatement benefit to the appellant - appellant is entitled to the benefit of notification - appeal allowed - decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Finance Act, 1994. 1.1 The Commissioner (Appeals) vide its impugned order gave the benefit of cum-tax duty and thus the liability of service tax was reduced to ₹ 27,17,330/-. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant is claiming benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 where value of goods and materials will get abatement benefit to the appellant. In other words, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e view that the documentary proof was submitted by the appellant to the Revenue, though Revenue in the impugned order-in-appeal notes that the benefit was not extendable to the appellant as the appellant had failed to show any documentary proof in respect of value of material and goods sold. The appellant has pointed out that there has been study of the data based on which it was concluded that fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
