TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... additional amount which are received by the appellant are for computer stationery charges, godown rent and establishment charges is not disputed that the said amounts are paid to the appellant as per the agreement in contract which talks about the reimbursement of expenses to the appellant. In the order-in-Review the learned Commissioner has not controverted the said facts by adducing evidences against the same. - Commissioner in the Review Order relies upon the provisions of Rule 5 of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 which were not in statute during the material period involved in this case. Suffice to say that the provisions which were not in statute cannot be applied for the demand of tax, the impugned order is on this p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 came into effect from 19.04.2006 and cannot be made applicable for the period in question in the case and held that it was governed by Rule 6(8) of Service Tax Rules 1994 which provided for discharge of service tax on an amount which was received in relation to the services provided by clearing and forwarding agent. The Commissioner as a reviewing authority reviewed the said order of the Asst. Commissioner and issued a show-cause notice to the appellant on the very same grounds. The said show-cause notice was also contested by the appellant. The Commissioner as a Reviewing Officer, after following the due process of law, did not agree with the condition registered by the appellant a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nses received by the appellant as per the contract, chargeable of service tax or otherwise. As correctly pointed by the learned Counsel, the period involved in this case is October 2002 to March 2006 wherein the provisions of Service Tax Rules, 1994 were applicable. 6.1 We find that as per Rule 6(8) of Service Tax Rules, 1994, the service tax liability which has to be discharged by service provider was the value received for the taxable service in relation to the services rendered by clearing and forwarding agent. From the perusal of the records, we find that there is no dispute as to the service tax discharged by the appellant on an amount received as compensation for the service rendered as clearing and forwarding agent; the additional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
