9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 768X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, HYDERABAD [ 2019 (11) TMI 675 - CESTAT HYDERABAD] by the appellant was not available to the Appellate Authority. The matter deserves therefore to be remitted back to the Appellate Authority to examine and comment on applicability of various case law which are now available as also the nature of contract and whether same were divisible or composite. Appellant shall be free to advance its arguments and Appellate Authority shall consider the case law (including since the time of settling of position by the Apex Court through L T case and its applicability) as also if contract conditions indicate a composite contract. While considering limitation, it will also consider the arguments, if any, put forth b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... invoice value on which CEX duty/sales tax already stood paid, was recovered by the Appellant from their customers and no evidence to this effect is adduced by the revenue as well. The SCN had quantified demand of Service Tax on entire sale value of cranes since as per department, erection and commissioning charges were included therein, and no separate breakup for the same was available. 2. Appellant have in their appeal memo and synopsis during the course of hearing sought to raise various grounds and relied upon the following case law: Allengers Medical Systems Limited 2009 (14) S.T.R. 235 (Tri.-Del.) Aalidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd 2022(12) TMI 11 M/s. Vishwanath Project Limited 2019(11)TMI 675- CESTAT Hyd M/s. Ballarpur Industries ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hydrabad in the matter of VISHWANATH PROJECTS LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, HYDRABAD in which in para 15 it was held as follow:- 15. A plain reading of the above shows that the contract involved both supply of material and installation and commissioning of the equipment with no clear demarcation/vivisection between the service component and the material component thereof. We, therefore, do not agree with Ld. DR that the contract can be vivisected, in this case and the demand has been raised on the entire value of the contract including the material part of it because the appellant failed to provide the break up. Had there been a break up of the material and the service components in the contract itself, the demand would have been r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned A.R indicated that this aspect was not examined by the authorities below because of non-availability of decisions at the time of passing of order 6. We find that this is the matter is old and benefit of L T case as well as VISHWANATH PROJECT LTD (cited supra) by the appellant was not available to the Appellate Authority. The matter deserves therefore to be remitted back to the Appellate Authority to examine and comment on applicability of various case law which are now available as also the nature of contract and whether same were divisible or composite. Appellant shall be free to advance its arguments and Appellate Authority shall consider the case law (including since the time of settling of position by the Apex Court through L T cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
