9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 727X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent : Sh Amresh Jain, DR JUDGEMENT Per: R K Singh: The appellants have filed this appeal against order-in-original No . Commissioner/RPR/68/2008 dated 18.08.2008 in terms of which service tax demand of Rs. 89,74,621/- has been confirmed alongwith interest on account of denial of an exemption notification and a further demand of Rs. 18,54,468/- is also confirmed alongwith interest in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of materials supplied free of cost by the client. We find that this issue stands settled in favour of the appellants by the Larger Bench decision in the case of M/s Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. vs. CST, Delhi - 2013-TIOL-1331-CESTAT-DEL-LB and thus the demand of Rs. 89,74,621/- is not sustainable. 3. As regard demand of Rs. 18 ,54,468 /- confirmed on the advance received by the appellant, we find t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st. It was only on 18.05.2012 that Section 67A was introduced which provided that the rate of service tax, value of taxable service and the rate of exchange, if any shall be the rate of service tax or value of taxable service or rate of exchange in force as applicable at the time when the taxable service has been provided or agreed to be provided. Obviously, Section 67A would only have prospective ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
