9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lar aspect has not been dealt with by the adjudication authority, the matter should go back to the original authority for verification of such computation sheet and for the determination of the exact service tax liability to be paid by the appellant for period 01.06.2007 to 29.02.2008. Valuation - includibility - free supply material in the gross value - Held that: - this Tribunal in the case of Yadav Fabricator & Contactor [2017 (4) TMI 562 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] has held that free supply items from the recipient of service to the provider of service is not to be considered for calculation of the gross amount for payment of service tax. Thus, free supply items will not be included for computation of the gross amount for the purpose of levy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n into consideration by the appellant for calculating the gross value of service. Further, an amount of ₹ 66,326/- was sought to be recovered from the appellant on the ground that the said amount was short paid by the appellant. The show cause notice issued in this record was adjudicated vide the impugned order dated 19.02.2014, wherein the service tax demand of ₹ 58,09,320/- was confirmed alongwith interest against the appellant. Besides, penalties were imposed under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Felling aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. 2. The ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the activities undertaken by the appellant pursuant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hould be classifiable under Commercial and Industrial Contactor service. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that the ld. Adjudicating authority has recorded the submissions of the appellant that the appellant had executed works contract for IOCL, which included labour service, technical Service and transfer of good in execution of such works contract. Further, the appellant had paid Sales Tax/ VAT on the transfer of goods consumed in the execution of the work contract. However, the benefit of works contract service has not been extended in the impugned order on the ground that no evidences were produced by the appellant, showing payment of Sales Tax/ VAT on the material supplied for execution of the work. With regard to classificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f service is not to be considered for calculation of the gross amount for payment of service tax. Thus, free supply items will not be included for computation of the gross amount for the purpose of levy of service tax. However, since the original authority has not recorded any specific findings with regard to actual free supply materials involved in execution of works contract, we are of the view that the matter should be remanded to him for consideration of the value of free supply material received by the appellant from the service receiver for execution of the works contract. On the basis of the documents, showing free supply of material, the benefit of abatement should be granted by the original authority. 7. With regard to short pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
