TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 312X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income from ‘Renting of Immovable Property’ was not leviable to tax and further expenses like electricity charges, water charges, insurance and property tax of the building, etc. incurred should not suffer service tax, in our opinion, an amount of more than Rs. 10 lakhs deposited by the appellant is sufficient for the purpose of pre-deposit and since we feel that in view of the above observations, the matter should be remanded to the original adjudicating authority so that the evidence and documents produced by the appellants are appreciated properly and conclusion is arrived at. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority, keeping all the issues open, with a request to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l under tax net prior to 1.6.2007, was not considered and has been totally ignored. Further he also submitted that the appellant s claim for deduction of reimbursed expenditure has been totally ignored on the ground that the documents were not furnished and the ledger extract is not sufficient. On the issue of Cenvat credit also similar stand has been taken that the appellant has not produced evidence. 3. After considering the records and submissions, we find considerable force in the argument that the documents and evidence put forth by the appellants have not been considered by lower authorities. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not gone into merits of the case since the condition of pre-deposit imposed by him in the stay order has not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence. 4. In the facts and circumstances, there is a need for fresh appreciation of Balance Sheet, Profit Loss Account and documents and evidence which the appellants have produced to consider whether the tax liability arises prior to 1.6.2007 and whether reimbursable expenses can be considered as expenditure category, etc. Each and every submission made by the appellant is required to be dealt with and we find that both the lower authorities failed to do so. Since we find that the appellant s claim that substantial income from Renting of Immovable Property was not leviable to tax and further expenses like electricity charges, water charges, insurance and property tax of the building, etc. incurred should not suffer service tax, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
