TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant directed to submit evidence for works contract valuation within 60 days; appeal remanded with specific directions.</h1> <h3>Srinivasan Associates Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore</h3> Srinivasan Associates Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore - TMI Issues: Classification of service for taxation, Evidence of materials used in works contract, Opportunity to present evidence, Application for re-adjudication, Stay applicationClassification of service for taxation:The appellant's counsel acknowledged that there is no dispute regarding the classification of the service provided. It was emphasized that if the gross value of the contract receipt is reduced by the value of the goods used in the contract, supported by verifiable evidence, the actual value of taxable service should be calculated reasonably. The counsel also clarified that the appellant is not claiming a composition scheme but is subject to the normal scheme of levy. Reference was made to a previous Tribunal decision upheld by the apex court to establish that the Finance Act, 1994 is not a commodity taxation law.Evidence of materials used in works contract:The revenue contended that the appellant failed to submit evidence of the materials used in the works contract to the adjudicating authority, leading to an appropriate order being passed based on the record. The Tribunal recognized the importance of substantiating the value of goods used in the execution of the works contract with evidence. It was deemed necessary to provide the appellant an opportunity to present necessary evidence supporting their claim on the value of goods used, which would impact the calculation of the taxable service value.Opportunity to present evidence:In light of the above, the Tribunal directed the appellant to make an application to the adjudicating authority within 60 days, accompanied by the evidence they intend to rely upon for determining the value of goods used in the works contract. The appellant was instructed to appear before the authority on the fixed date without seeking adjournment to explain their case. The authority was tasked with reevaluating the adjudication after affording the appellant a reasonable opportunity to be heard.Application for re-adjudication:It was clarified that the classification of service and any plea for a composition scheme should not be contested during the re-adjudication process. The appeal was remanded to the adjudicating authority with specific directions to reconsider the adjudication in light of the evidence to be presented by the appellant.Stay application:The stay application was disposed of in view of the order for re-adjudication, and the appeal was remanded to the adjudicating authority for further proceedings as directed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
