2010 (2) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i S.J. Vyas, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri R. Nagar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. - Appellant is engaged in providing service of retreading of old tyres. There is no dispute that this activity between liable for service tax which affects from 16-6-05. On 7-12-05, the officers visited the appellants premises carried out a search and recorded statements....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 demanding service tax for the period from 1-10-05 to 31-3-07. This show cause notice also demanded service tax for the differential amount between the labour charges and the actual amount collected by the appellant. In this case also suppression of fact was invoked and penalty was proposed. After adjudication and appellate proceedings culminated in confirmation of the demand, rejection of the re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s year exceeded Rs. 4 lakhs. It is not the case of the department that the activity undertaken by the appellant was liable to service tax in the previous year. The Commissioner has failed to take note of this aspect. Learned DR also supported the Commissioner's observation that gross value of turn over is required to be taken. However, we find that the Commissioner has not discussed and considered....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a view that material cost indicated separately in the invoices is eligible for abatement under Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. The learned advocate fairly agrees that these decisions were not cited before the learned Commissioner. Therefore we consider it appropriate that this issue is to be remanded for consideration. We also take note of the fact that once all issues are considered and if they go ....