TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e agreement and service tax is not charged over and above the commission which means that the commission given by the ICICI Bank is inclusive of service tax. Cum-duty benefit - HELD THAT:- Since the appellant is not charging the service tax separately and whatever commission is received, the Department has computed the service tax liability on the same which is to be considered as cum-duty and the appellant is entitled to the benefit of cum-duty and the entire demand is to be recomputed by giving the benefit of cum-duty to the appellant. Since the benefit of cum-duty has not been given, therefore the case remanded back to the original authority to pass a De novo order and quantify the demand of service tax after giving the benefit of cum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discharging their service tax liability and accordingly after following the principles of natural justice, the original authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 5,12,045/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Twelve Thousand and Forty Five only) for the period January 2013 to March 2014. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner who rejected the same. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that appellant could not pay the service tax due to financial constraint and subsequently paid th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther hand the learned AR defended the impugned order and submitted that the appellant has also defaulted in payment of service tax for the earlier period and during the year 2012 he has opted for VCES Scheme. He further submitted that the appellant has collected the service tax and has not paid the same. Therefore, he is not entitled to any benefit under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. In support of his submission, he relied upon the following decisions: a. Ketan Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE ST, Surat 2014 (36) S.T.R. 196 (Tri.-Ahmd.) b. Mohtamaan Industries Vs. CCE, Cus. S.T., Pune I 2016 (42) S.T.R. 568 (Tri.-Mum.) c. CCE, Mangalore Vs. K. Vijaya C. Rai 2011 (21) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
