9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 233X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e clear provision made under Section 67 Clause 2 that states that where gross amount is charged by the service provider which is inclusive of Service Tax payable, the value of taxable service shall be such amount as, with the addition of tax payable, is equal to the gross amount charged, the Appellant is liable to pay Service Tax after deducting the Service Tax due amount from the gross amount. In other words, Appellant is entitled to com-tax benefit as provided under Section 67(2) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal is allowed in part and the order of the Commissioner is modified to the extent that the Service Tax liability of the Appellant would be confined to the normal period with cum-tax benefit as provided in Section 67(2) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also. Accordingly Appellant was put to show-cause vide notice dated 13.10.2014 by the Commissioner of Customs, Excise and Service Tax at Nagpur, that remained unanswered and thereafter through an adjudication order, he confirmed the entire duty amount under Section 73(1) and equivalent penalty under Section 78 as well as penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Section 77 of Finance Act, 1994. Legality of the said order is assailed by the Assesse-Appellant in this appeal. 3. During the course of hearing of the appeal leaned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. D.H. Nadkarni, in placing reliance on the decision reported in Reliance Securities Limited reported in 2019 (20) GSTL 265 (T), Invincible Security Services - reported in 2009 (13) STR 185 (T), Navyu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Media Consultant, confirmation of demand at best could have been done on the basis of cum-tax value for the normal period and not on the gross value. 4. Per contra learned Authorised Representative for the Respondent-Department Mr. Badhe Piyush Barasu submitted that the issue is no more res integra in view of the findings of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal where all points raised by the Appellant were dealt with and answered with utmost clarity. He submits that it was held by the Larger Bench in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi Vs. Melang Developers Private Limited, cited supra that in the scheme of Service Tax, the concept of CENVAT Credit enables every service provider in a service chain to take input credit of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equal to the gross amount charged, the Appellant is liable to pay Service Tax after deducting the Service Tax due amount from the gross amount. In other words, Appellant is entitled to com-tax benefit as provided under Section 67(2) of the Finance Act, 1994. We also find force in the submissions of the learned Counsel for the Appellant that there was confusion on the issue of taxability and liability of sub-contractor to pay the same in cases when the main contractor had discharged the ultimate Service Tax liability that had necessitated establishment of Larger Bench of this Tribunal to give a final verdict on the conflicting decisions emerged in the field. We are, therefore, of the firm opinion that extended period on the ground of suppre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
