TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 737X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said decision, we are of the view that the demand raised including value of materials cannot sustain. The learned counsel has submitted that if the value of materials is excluded from the total taxable value as raised in the show-cause notice, the appellant would fall within the threshold limit for the disputed period. However, this fact requires to be verified. For the limited purpose of verifying as to whether the appellant falls within the threshold limit, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- The appellant has not taken any Service Tax or Central Excise registration. The Board by its Circular dated 27.02.2012 has only clarified that the tyre retreading activity is subject to levy of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed demand of ₹ 45,01,343/- along with interest and also imposed penalties. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2.0 On behalf of the appellant, the learned counsel Shri V. Ravindran submitted that the value of the materials consumed by the appellant while providing the services has to be excluded from the total value as per Notification No.12/2003. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Safety Retreading Co. (P) Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem reported in 2017 (48) S.T.R.97 (S.C.) . It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that when the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lue of materials has been separately charged for the year 2009-10. This would indicate that the appellant is not liable for the benefit of Notification No.12/2003 for the year 2009-10. It is also submitted by him that to verify whether the appellant falls within the threshold limit, the matter requires to be remanded. 4. Heard both sides. 5. On perusal of the records as well as after considering the submissions made by the appellants, it is seen that the demand has been raised after including the value of materials in the total taxable value. The Hon ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Safety Retreading Co. (P) Ltd ., (supra) has held that value of materials cannot be included for arriving at the total taxable val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be manufacture. The evasion of tax would not have come to light but for interference by department. For these reasons, we find that the contentions raised by the appellant that the extended period is not invocable cannot sustain. Thus argument on limitation fails. 7. From the above discussions, the appeal is partly allowed and remanded for the limited purpose of verification and reqantification by excluding the material consumed for providing the services from the total quantity of taxable value and if so to verify whether the appellant would be eligible for threshold limit exemption. Appeal partly allowed in the above terms. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Service Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
