Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the service tax demand was correctly quantified by including amounts allegedly received for supply of drivers, gardeners, sweepers and for security of movable property, and whether the matter required reconsideration in light of the exemption claimed under Notification No. 56/98-ST dated 07.10.1998.
Analysis: The appellant produced invoices indicating that part of the receipts related to supply of personnel such as drivers and gardeners and not exclusively to security agency services. The claim also required examination of the asserted exemption for security of movable property under Notification No. 56/98-ST. As the record needed fresh verification of the breakup of receipts and the lower authority had not examined the matter on the basis of the additional material now produced, the quantification issue could not be finally sustained on the existing record.
Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision after granting an opportunity of hearing; the appellant obtained relief on the quantification issue.