Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 79 - AT - Service TaxDemand of Service tax - valuation adopted by the appellant in accordance with Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 or not - HELD THAT:- The undisputed fact is that the appellant provided works contract; it also discharged VAT at a certain percentage, admittedly as prescribed by the relevant States. In order to ascertain the correctness of the appellant's claim, it appears that even the Chief Commissioner authorised a cost accountant to verify the same - It is found from the record that in the appellant’s own case JOHNSON LIFTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (ST) CHENNAI-IV [2018 (6) TMI 384 - CESTAT CHENNAI], although for a different period, even the original authority had accepted the value of service portion as 15% only, which the appellant claimed to have followed in the year under challenge. In its decision in the case of SAFETY RETREADING COMPANY (P) LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SALEM, M/S TYRESOLES INDIA PRIVATE LMITED VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GOA AND M/S LAXMI TYRES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE [2017 (1) TMI 1110 - SUPREME COURT], the Hon’ble Apex Court has held The finding of the Appellate Tribunal that it is the entire of the gross value of the service rendered that is liable to service tax, in our considered view, does not lay down the correct proposition of law which, according to us, is that an assessee is liable to pay tax only on the service component which under the State Act has been quantified at 30%. The impugned demand cannot sustain, for which reason the impugned orders deserve to be set aside - Appeal allowed.
|