9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ms. Avani Mehta for the Appellant. Manoj Kumar Rajak for the Respondent. ORDER Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member- After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duties and penalties, we proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as the issue lies in narrow compass. 2. The appellant is a service tax registered company under the category of Insurance Auxiliary Services and were pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documentary evidences to support their contention that whatever expenses reimbursed by the clients have been actually incurred by them were produced whereas the appellant stated that they had submitted all the documentary evidences substantiating their claim and the same were verified by the concerned officer and thereafter on verification a demand of Rs. 20,629 was raised which was duly paid on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cular cited by the appellant is not applicable in the present case as it clarifies about reimbursable expenses whereas the appellants have claimed exemption on the expenses which are not reimbursed but charged to the client for certain input expenses. The appellants have not disclosed exemption claimed by them in their ST-3 return which amounts to suppression of facts and therefore, extended perio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apses cannot act prejudice to the assessees. We have also been shown the reply to the audit objection, wherein the appellant has produced entire evidences (almost 10,000 pages) in support of their contention of such reimbursable charges. Further, the fact that such reimbursable charges were being claimed on flat rate basis is also no ground to deny the entire charges. If at all the flat rate recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
