9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 846X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taxable service covered under section 60(105)(zzt) of the Finance Act, 1994 (FA 1994). 2. During scrutiny of the ST3 Returns filed by the appellant, it was noticed that they have claimed 50% abatement of gross amount charge from their clients in terms of Notification Nos. 20/2004-ST dated 10/09/2004 and 01/2006-ST dated 01/03/2005. As per the fast food agreement entered into by the appellant with their clients i.e. M/s Tata Consultancy Services Ltd (TCSL) and M/s Accenture Services Private Ltd (ASPL) the appellant have supplied only snacks and fast food items and did not appear to have supplied any 'substantial and satisfying meals', as envisaged by the above notifications. It hence appeared that they were not eligible to avail the benefi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od stuff in the said space to be purchased by the employees of their client for a price which is necessarily to be equated for shop or restaurant. c) Notification number 20/2004 dated 10/09/24 provides a methodology to determine the service value in a composite transaction involving sale and service by permitting the portion meant of 50% of the gross value between the sale and service. Therefore, there is a need to avoid any arrow interpretation of the term 'meal' as explained in the said notification. d) The SCN's issued to the appellant proceeds on the assumption that the food items supplied by them is not a 'substantial and satisfying meal' as envisaged in the notification number 20/0024 - ST without any material being brought on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation number 20/2004 - ST dated 10/09/2004 and 1/2006- ST which was meant for the supply of 'a substantial and satisfying meal' as envisaged under the notification. B. A SCN was issued to the appellant and the matter adjudicated only on the ground that they were not eligible for the benefit of the said notification since they did not satisfy the condition stated in the notification. The appellant has now sought to enlarge the scope of the appeal by challenging the applicability of the very levy itself in their case. C. As per Notification 1/2006- ST at Sl. No. 8 under the head 'catering', it is clearly stated that the exemption shall apply in cases where the outdoor caters also provide food and the invoice bill or challan issued indicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of both the sides, did not take place on merits before the Original Authority. This puts Revenue at a disadvantage as it did not get a chance to respond to the appellants averments before the Original Authority and it has also deprived us of the views of the Original Authority on this important legal issue. We thus feel that this is a fit case for remand with all issues left open. 9. Having regard to the discussions above, we remand the matter back to the Original Authority for de novo adjudication. The lower authority shall follow the principles of natural justice and afford a reasonable and time bound opportunity to the appellant to state their case both orally and in writing if they so wish, before issuing a speaking order in the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
