TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 1379
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(AR) ORDER Per: B.S.V. Murthy; The appellant is engaged in providing the service of commercial or industrial construction service and works contract service. During the period 1st April 2007 to 31.3.2010, on finding that the appellant had not included the value of steel and cement supplied by the service receivers for the purpose of payment of service tax and at the same time the appellant had ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 67 requires service tax to be paid on the consideration received from the service receiver either in the form of money or in any other form. According to him, it cannot be said that in this case by using the cement and steel provided by the service receiver, there is additional consideration received by the appellant from the service receiver. Once what is received is not a consideration e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that this decision covers the period prior to 1.5.2006 as well as the subsequent period and clearly takes a view that the value of goods supplied by the receiver to the provider are required to be included if the benefit of Notification No.1/2006 is availed. He also submits that this decision has been followed by the Tribunal subsequently in M/s. VPR Mining Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Hydera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case of Jaihind Projects Ltd. which was a final order has not been set aside by any higher forum. In fact the learned Chartered Accountant stated fairly that an appeal filed against this decision before the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been admitted but no stay has been granted. On the other hand as submitted by the learned Additional Commissioner (AR), we find that this decision has been taken n....