9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istered services, conformed to the definition of taxable service. Except to point out that the show cause notice had adequately covered the charges, the grounds of appeal appear to give the impression that the impugned order is bereft of a finding on merit. It is in that context that this appeal needs disposal. In the absence of any justifiable challenge on merit in the grounds of appeal, we ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agent service that had been excluded in the computation of assessable value ascertainable from the returns for April 2008 to March 2009. 2. The tax authorities contended that the appellant had failed to justify the reasons for seeking the exclusion of such substantial amounts from the assessable value. Both the demands pertain to contracts with customers in relation to logistic support for imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e agents service. 3. Revenue appears peeved by the general structuring of the impugned order in which the adjudicating authority has framed many questions, including that of merit of leviability on both counts, and, in the course of determining the answers to each, has indulged in prolixity that was spiritedly critical for the lack of evidence, as well as the over-dependence on presumptions an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impression that the impugned order is bereft of a finding on merit. It is in that context that this appeal needs disposal. 5. We take note that the impugned order has examined jurisdiction to adjudicate and specificity of allegations in the notice. The adjudicating authority has also examined the merit to render a finding that the definition of the two services do not cover the activity wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
