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>Tribunal overturns valuation orders for cable operator services citing lack of evidence</h1> <h3>West Coast Paper Mills Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Mangalore</h3> West Coast Paper Mills Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Mangalore - 2018 (9) G. S. T. L. 195 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues: Valuation of service rendered by the appellant under cable operator service.The judgment involves two appeals against impugned orders passed by Commissioner(Appeals), Mangalore, concerning the valuation of services provided by the appellant as a cable operator. The dispute revolves around the consideration received by the appellant for distributing TV signals received from a Multi-System Operator (MSO) to its employees. The Revenue contended that the cost incurred by the appellant in receiving signals should be included in the taxable value, leading to a demand against the appellant under Rule 5 of Valuation Rules.The appellant argued that they had already paid tax to the MSO for the TV signals received and had also collected service tax from their employees for distribution. Since no additional consideration was received from employees, they contended that there should be no further taxable value. The Revenue, however, maintained that the cost of service from the MSO was directly linked to the distribution of signals to employees.After hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the appellants had collected consideration for the service provided to employees, with no evidence of any extra payments or non-monetary considerations received. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific and tangible evidence to quantify non-monetary considerations under Section 67 of Valuation. Since there was no evidence of under-statement or additional payments beyond the collected consideration, the Tribunal concluded that there was no basis for varying the taxable value.Therefore, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed, with the Tribunal determining that there was no scope for adjusting the taxable value based on the arguments and evidence presented during the proceedings.
TaxTMI 