2013 (9) TMI 591

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and perused the record. 3. Appellant herein is a person who is conducted port services at Dahej Harbour/ Port. Appellant is entitled to charge an amount of service rendered by them. Appellant charges a specific amount from the port users for the services rendered by them but at the same time, when the same services are utilised by M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited, the appellant charges them less amount than the amount being charged from all the other service recipients. This charging of less amount is due to the fact that M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited had installed their own machineries which are being used by the appellant for rendering the said services. It is his submission that the issue is of inclusion of differential amount not c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this case is regarding correct value to be considered for discharge of service tax liability. It is undisputed that the appellant is charging less amount from M/s. Hindalco Industries for utilising the machinery which has been erected by them at Dahej Harbour/ Port. We find that the entire issue revolves around the definition of the amount gross value charged, which has already been decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Limited (supra). We respectfully reproduce the ratio of their Lordships, which is enshrined in paragraph 18 :- 18. Section 66 levies service tax at a particular rate on the value of taxable services. Section 67(1) makes the provisions of the section subj....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rom the service provider under the charging Section, but it seeks to extract something more from him by including in the valuation of the taxable service the other expenditure and costs which are incurred by the service provider in the course of providing taxable service. What is brought to charge under the relevant Sections is only the consideration for the taxable service. By including the expenditure and costs, Rule 5(1) goes far beyond the charging provisions and cannot be upheld. It is no answer to say that under sub-section (4) of Section 94 of the Act, every rule framed by the Central Government shall be laid before each House of Parliament and that the House has the power to modify the rule. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Hu....