TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (9) TMI 366
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Bench): 1. As per the facts on record, the respondents are engaged in providing photography services to their customers. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the legal issue as to whether the value of paper, chemicals and packing materials used by them is required to be added in the value of services being provided by them so as to make the entire gross amount charged by them ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Appeals). Hence, the present appeal. 3. We have heard Shri S. Mukherjee, learned Chartered Accountant for the appellant and Shri K.K. Jaiswal, learned SDR for the Revenue. 4. We find that the issue on merits is no more res integra and stands settled in favour of the Revenue by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Agrawal Colour Photo Industries vs. Commissioner,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that service provider was entitled to claim exemption in respect of inputs, material consumed / sold to the service recipient. Apart from the above clarification, the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shilpa Colour Lab reported in [2007 (5) STR 423 (Tri-Bang)] as also in the case of Adlab Labs reported in [2006 (2) STR 121 (Tri)] etc. were in favour of the assessee. As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of Cosmic Dye Chemical vs. CCE, Bombay reported in (1995) 6 Supreme Court Cases 117 has observed that malafide intention is an essential element for invokation of longer period of limitation. There being different views of High Courts expressing conflicting opinion on the point of dispute are sufficient reasons for any person to entertain a bonafide belief. In the circumstances, mis-state....