Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 558 - CESTAT HYDERABADCUM tax benefit - the amount of mobilisation advances where tax twiced by the department while arriving at the demand - appellant claim that the department has stated that the demand is arrived after granting the CUM tax benefit, the details of calculation would show that the appellant has not been given such CUM tax benefit - Held that: - the appellant has received an amount of ₹ 1,68,35,716/- during the period 2006-07 to 2010-11. The department has taken this whole amount as taxable value and calculated the service tax demand on this amount. Therefore it is clear that the appellant has not been extended the benefit of CUM tax - mobilisation advances which had been taxed twice is maintained - there is a denial of CUM tax benefit even though it is stated to be given to the appellant, the matter requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority to the limited extent of considering the CUM tax benefit - appeal allowed by way of remand.
|