TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1031X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to include the value of free supply material in the assessable value for the purpose of tax. The issue was decided by original adjudicating authority in favour of appellant on the grounds of limitation and the demand was set aside. It is apparent that while the Revenue s attempt to classify the service provided by the appellant under the Commercial Industrial Construction Service and to include the value of free supply material has failed in the Tribunal, the original self-assessment of the appellant made under the head of Erection Commissioning Installation remained undisturbed. The claim of refund is in respect of assessment under the head of Erection Commissioning and Installation remains undisturbed. Thus the claim of refun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he original adjudicating authority on account of limitation. 3. Learned counsel pointed out that Revenue filed this appeal against said order dropping the demand on account of limitation in respect of the demand of Rs. 31,74,721/-, which was in respect of free supply material. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed revenue s appeal. Learned counsel pointed out that the notice seeking to reclassify activity was not challenged by Revenue before Commissioner (Appeals) and hence Revenue could not have challenged the supplementary demand on account of free supply material. The appellant appealed before Tribunal and succeeded and the demand on free supply material was set aside by Tribunal. Learned counsel pointed out that in the stay order of Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udicating authority in favour of appellant on the grounds of limitation and the demand was set aside. When the matter was agitated before Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the order. Learned Counsel pointed out that the appeal filed by revenue before Commissioner (Appeals) was only limited to the issue of addition of free supply material and no appeal was filed in respect of adjustment of Rs. 20,22,971/- from the head of Erection Commissioning and Installation to the head of Commercial Industrial Construction Service . From the above, it is apparent that while the Revenue s attempt to classify the service provided by the appellant under the Commercial Industrial Construction Service and to include the value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
