TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal No.: ST/00395/2012 - Final Order No. 43037/2018 - Dated:- 13-11-2018 - Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) And Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) Shri. J. Shankar Raman, Advocate for the Appellant Shri. B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per P. Dinesha : The appellant is engaged in providing services under the category of Architect Service and Consulting Engineer Service and is also registered with the Service Tax Department. 2. Brief facts are that the lower authority sought to demand service tax on visiting charges which is nothing but expenses incurred towards travel by Air/Train/Car and hotel expenses. The demand was made for the period from 01.04.2004 to 31.03.2009 vide S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of that valuation as that amount is not calculated for providing such taxable service . That according to us is the plain meaning which is to be attached to Section 67 (unamended, i.e., prior to May 1, 2006) or after its amendment, with effect from, May 1, 2006. Once this interpretation is to be given to Section 67, it hardly needs to be emphasised that Rule 5 of the Rules went much beyond the mandate of Section 67. We, therefore, find that High Court was right in interpreting Sections 66 and 67 to say that in the valuation of taxable service, the value of taxable service shall be the gross amount charged by the service provider for such service and the valuation of tax service cannot be anything more or less than the consideration paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the findings of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the records and gone through the judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court relied on by the Ld. Advocate for the assessee. 6.1 We are convinced that for the period involved, reimbursable expenditure is not liable to be included in that value of the taxable services, the amendment for which makes it includible only with effect from 14.05.2015. Therefore, we accept the plea of the Ld. Advocate and hold that there is no liability to pay the balance of the demand. 6.2 With regard to penalties, we note that the issue involved interpretation which came to be settled only by the above ruling of the Hon ble Supreme Court and therefore no suppression, fraud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
