9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is noticed that in the year 2006-07 the impugned order treated the entire amount received as commission and treat the same as the assessable value for payment of duty. It is oppose that the total amount received as commission in the instant case as should be treat as exclusive of the commission and that have been granted - No reason have been recorded as to why the benefit of cum-duty have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nufacturers Pvt. Ltd. against confirming the demand of Service Tax and imposition of penalty. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant argued that they are engaged in the selling passenger car of M/s Maruti Suzuki Ltd. and also engaged in providing services to insurance companies and finance companies which falls under the category of "Business Auxiliary Services". During the Audit Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Service Tax however no record in the proceeding. She argued that for the year 2006-07 the liability of Service Tax on com-duty basis on the taxable value of ₹ 89,84,299/- would be ₹ 9,88,305/- while the appellant had made payment of Service Tax of ₹ 10,25,007/- thus in fact excess duty payment of Service Tax made. She argued that in the financial year 2008-09 the deduction o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treat the same as the assessable value for payment of duty. It is oppose that the total amount received as commission in the instant case as should be treat as exclusive of the commission and that have been granted. No reason have been recorded as to why the benefit of cum-duty have been granted to amount have been received. 5. Similarly the reconciliation-9, it is apparent that while gross amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
