Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 808 - AT - Service TaxJurisdiction - security agency service - cum-tax benefit - whether impugned adjudication order passed by Commissioner, Raipur which also determines liability for their office at Nowrozabad within Bhopal jurisdiction, whether the demand to that extent is without jurisdiction? - Held that:- So far the demand raised in the impugned order relating to Bhopal Commissionerate, of the Amlai office of the appellant, in respect of services in the state of M.P. is concerned, the said demand hit for jurisdiction, and accordingly set aside. Cum-tax benefit - Held that:- The gross amount taken by Revenue for raising the demand, in the facts and circumstances, the element of services tax was included and accordingly we hold that the appellant is entitled to cum-tax benefit for calculation of service tax liability. Valuation - quantification of taxable value on the receipt basis - Held that:- Tax demanded on gross value of bill raised, during the financial year, which is apparently erroneous, as tax was required to be demanded and/or calculated on receipt basis, as per applicable law till 31/03/2011 - gross demand raised is set aside - matter remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for recalculation of demand on receipt basis with respect to the services provided under the Raipur Commissionerate. Penalties - Held that:- There is no case for deliberate default on the part of the appellant as they have disclosed their turnover and liability towards service tax in their balance-sheet - Further there is no case by Revenue that there has been diversion of funds from the business of the appellant for non-business use - penalties set aside. Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand.
|