TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otification No. 18/2005-ST dated 07.06.2005 - Held that:- adjudicating order in its discussion and finding portion has not devoted even a single line to discuss the includibility of the value of free supplies in the assessable value for the purpose of granting 67% abatement under the aforesaid notifications. However, this omission loses its significance considerably as the impugned Order-in-Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Shri Jitendra Singh, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri Devendra Singh, AR JUDGEMENT Per: R K Singh: The appellants filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 205/ST/DII/2012 dated 25.10.2012 which had up held the Order-in-Original No. 01/JC/1/2011/ dated 14.01.2011. 2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under: The appellants had entered into contracts for cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. AR fairly conceded that the issue of inclusion value of free supply in the gross amount charged has been decided by CESTAT Larger Bench in the case of Bhayana Builders Vs. CST - 2013-TIOL-1331-CESTAT-DEL-LB. 5. We have considered the facts and the submissions. We find that the adjudicating order in its discussion and finding portion has not devoted even a single line to discuss the includi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rger Bench was not available. 7. In view of the law relating the free supplies having now been settled by the CESTAT Larger Bench in the case of Bhayana Builders, it is deemed appropriate to remand the case to the original adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication. Accordingly we set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the original adjudicating authority for adjudicating the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
