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>Adjudication error in quantifying service tax for reimbursements overturned on appeal.</h1> <h3>M/s. International Logistics Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Indore</h3> The Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority erred in quantifying the service tax for miscellaneous reimbursements as the appeal was specific to man ... Demand of Service Tax - Miscellaneous reimbursements - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to pass a fresh order. The Adjudicating Authority was, therefore, required to re-determine the quantum of tax for two services, namely man power and security services. There was no occasion for Adjudicating Authority to determine the quantum of tax for ‘miscellaneous reimbursement’ as that was not even an issue before the Tribunal. The appellant is therefore, justified in ascertaining that the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority to the extent it quantifies the amount of service tax for miscellaneous reimbursement needs to be set aside. The order dated 20 February 2013 to the extent it quantifies the amount of service tax towards miscellaneous reimbursement is set aside - Appeal allowed. Issues:Confirmation of demand of service tax on miscellaneous reimbursements.Analysis:The appellant challenged an order confirming the demand of service tax on miscellaneous reimbursements, not challenging the demand against man power and security services. Initially, the Joint Commissioner confirmed the demand for man power and security but dropped the demand for miscellaneous reimbursement. The Commissioner (Appeals) later dropped the demand for man power and security services. The department appealed against the dropping of demand for man power and security, leading to a Tribunal order remanding the matter to determine the ultimate quantum of service tax demand. The adjudicating authority, in a subsequent order, confirmed the demand for all three services. The appellant contended that the order should have focused only on man power and security services, as the department's appeal was limited to these two services. The Tribunal's statement was cited as the reason for including miscellaneous reimbursement in the order.The Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority erred in quantifying the service tax for miscellaneous reimbursement, as the appeal was specific to man power and security services. The initial dropping of demand for miscellaneous reimbursement was not an issue before the Tribunal. The appellant's argument that the order should not have quantified the service tax for miscellaneous reimbursement was deemed justified. Consequently, the order quantifying the service tax for miscellaneous reimbursement was set aside, and the appeal was allowed to this extent.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
