TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tly with other evidence. The sustenance of demand amount without other corroborative evidence cannot be upheld. Moreover, due abatement of threshold exemption limit, if admissible, is a right of the appellant and cannot be ignored and therefore cannot be denied. Moreover, it is held in a series of cases that no tax is leviable on the tax component perse. The demand for duty as made out in the show cause notice and consequent demand for payment of interest and penalty cannot be considered and is not made out. The impugned order of the lower authority is set aside and the matter remanded with the direction that due abatement as admissible to the appellant based on threshold limits, as well as discounting of sales that are VAT paid be consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant was liable to service tax as per table indicated below: F. Year P L (Income Expenses liable to Service Tax) ST rate % ST demand (Rs.) Sale Of Service Any Other Income Legal Expen ses Total (Rs.) 2014-15 17,61,196 1,21,612 11,900 18,94,708* 12.36 2,34,186 2015-16 18,46,747 0 0 19,82,823 14.5 2,67,778 2016-17 19,82,823 0 0 19,82,823 15 2,97,423 2017-18 (up to June 2017) 20,16,206 0 0 20,16,206** 15 3,02,431 TOTAL 11,01,818 *For F.Y. 2014-15 the figures of whole year have been taken as deemed receipts (on presumption) for Oct-14 to March-15 on the pretext of absence of month wise receipts. **Further, for the F.Y. 2017-18 it has been stated that the figures have been arrived at by deducting Rs.1,39,204/- (26AS receipts from J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by virtue of amended provision of Section 67 could such reimbursable expenditure or cost form part of the value of taxable service for the purpose of tax levy. Thus, warranty services rendered by the appellant prior to the aforesaid period cannot be taxed. There is also merit in the appellants submission that no tax can be demanded on an amount of Rs.3,09,143/- for the period 2014-15 towards sale of spare parts on which VAT has been paid. It is their contention that the abatement amount as worked out towards the aforesaid amounts need to be provided to them while working out the quantum of tax short levied, if any. For the Financial Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 they have submitted that merely working out the tax amount on the basis of gross fig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the demand for duty as made out in the show cause notice and consequent demand for payment of interest and penalty cannot be considered and is not made out. The impugned order of the lower authority is set aside and the matter remanded with the direction that due abatement as admissible to the appellant based on threshold limits, as well as discounting of sales that are VAT paid be considered before re-adjudicating the matter afresh. 6. On the plea of the AR that the appellant had not tendered any reply to the show cause notice nor appeared for the personal hearing before the adjudicating authority and that sufficient chances were afforded to the appellant and that they had not produced any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
