9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the condition of N/N. 12/2003 is not tenable. In the absence of any evidence to show that there were sale of goods in the provision of service, N/N. 12/2003 cannot be applied - Similarly, the claim of reimbursable expenses on travel and stay of staff during the course of rendering service cannot be accepted on the face value as the invoices only show unit charges. Time Limitation - Held that:- There were two show cause notices invoking extended period. The second notice cannot invoke the extended period as the issue of tax liability and valuation should have been examined comprehensively when the matter was investigated by the officers when recording in the first notice - the extended period of limitation involved in the second notice is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e actually used for conducting the inspection and testing are shown separately and they are sold to the clients are clearly exempted by Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. (b) Regarding deputing the staff for conducting testing, there are certain expenses incurred for stay, transportation and other incidental expenses which are claimed as reimbursable expenses from the client not to be taxed for certification services. 3. He also contested the valuation on limitation as there were two separate proceedings both invoking extended period for the same period. He also pleaded, in case of service tax liability confirmed that they should be allowed cum-tax benefit under Section 67 (2) of the Finance Act, 1994. In any case, the question involved is one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the course of rendering service cannot be accepted on the face value as the invoices only show unit charges. There is no evidence on either prearrangement or accepted reimbursable expenses with separate documents for such expenditure. As such, we are not able to interfere with the findings of the lower authorities. 7. Regarding limitation, we note that there were two show cause notices invoking extended period. We note that the second notice cannot invoke the extended period as the issue of tax liability and valuation should have been examined comprehensively when the matter was investigated by the officers when recording in the first notice. Accordingly, the extended period of limitation involved in the second notice is not sustainable. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
