9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellants are providing services of C&F Agent to M/s. Srinivas Fine Arts Limited for marketing their products and was not discharging service tax liability on such services. It was also noticed that customers had entrusted the work of maintaining the sales branches, custody of goods, marketing, billing and collection etc. for their products to the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the services and the department has included all these expenses to arrive at the total taxable value which is incorrect as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. vide Civil Appeal No. 2013 of 2014 dated 7.3.2018. He requested that the matter may be remanded to the adjudicating authority to give the ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ible for exemption and hence did not discharge the service tax. He pleaded that the penalties may be waived. 3. The ld. AR Shri S. Govindarajan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The ld. consultant has submitted that he is not contesting the liability to pay service tax and is only confining the contest to the inclusion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xclusion of reimbursable expenses on the basis of records furnished by the appellant, the issue is remanded to the adjudicating authority. 6. The ld. consultant has pleaded to waive the penalties. The original authority has imposed penalty under section 76, 77 as well as 78 of the Finance Act and the same has been totally upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Needless to say that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
