9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1469X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Coimbatore [2018 (5) TMI 677 - CESTAT CHENNAI], where it was held that the cost of spare parts cannot be included for purposes of levy of service tax - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned Order-in-Original Nos. 87 & 88/2012 dated 29.03.2012 rejected the claim of the appellant while upholding the Orders passed by the lower adjudicating authority. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee is in appeal before this forum. 4. Today when the matter came up for hearing, Ld. Advocate Ms. S. Sridevi appeared on behalf of the assessee/appellant and Ld. AC (AR) Shri. B. Balamurugan appeared on behalf of the Revenue. 5. During the course of hearing, Ld. Advocate submitted that the issue involved in this case is no more res integra as the same has already been considered and laid to rest by the decision of CESTAT, Chennai in the case of M/s. Shiva Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore in Appeal No. ST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax is not justified and hence are set aside. 6. In respect of amounts recovered by way of extended warranty premium, we note that there is no justification to consider such amounts as reimbursements of the cost of spares by the manufacturers of motor vehicles. The extended warranty premium amounts are liable to payment of service tax under the appropriate category of service but it stands submitted that the service tax demand thereon has been paid by the manufacturers of motor vehicles to whom such premium has been transferred. Consequently, we find no justification for demand of service tax of such amounts which are also set aside. Following the same, we are of the view that the demand cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
