TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... satisfy the condition subject to which the benefit thereunder can be granted. It is seen that for the benefit of notification No.12/2003-ST the appellants have to show documentary evidence specifically indicating the value of goods/ material sold. The appellants' claim that they have paid the VAT on 80% of the value may possibly be an indicator of the value of goods involved but it cannot be accepted on the face value in the absence of any documentary evidence to the effect that the said VAT was indeed paid on the goods/material used in respect of the service on which impugned demands have been confirmed. While at the stage of deciding their stay application, it is not possible to go into the details of the evidence with regard to the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oviding completion and finishing services and paid duty on 33% of gross amount received by claiming exemption under notification No. 1/2006-ST. In terms of the above-mentioned adjudication orders, it was held that appellants were not entitled for the said benefit because 67% abatement under Notification No. 1/2006-ST is not allowed in respect of completion and finishing services. The adjudicating authority also found appellants to be guilty of willful mis-statement / suppression as they deliberately availed of 67% abatement even when the said abatement was unambiguous by not available in their case. As the issue involved in both these cases is identical, the stay petitions are disposed of by this common order. 3. The appellants have c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellants have to show documentary evidence specifically indicating the value of goods/ material sold. The appellants' claim that they have paid the VAT on 80% of the value may possibly be an indicator of the value of goods involved but it cannot be accepted on the face value in the absence of any documentary evidence to the effect that the said VAT was indeed paid on the goods/material used in respect of the service on which impugned demands have been confirmed. While at the stage of deciding their stay application, it is not possible to go into the details of the evidence with regard to the value of such goods and materials sold by the appellants, the fact remains that they have already paid the service tax on 33% of the gross amount r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
