2015 (1) TMI 488

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2,62,84,245/- 2. 2008-09 Nil 3. 2009-10 1,07,53,337/- 4. 2010-11 2,23,16,485/-   2. Insofar as the period 2003-04 to 2007-08 is concerned, submission of learned C.A. is that demand is not sustainable if pleading of appellant at pages 119 & 120 of the appeal folder is considered. He submits that deposit and Cenvat credit reversal has been made much more than service tax demanded as per show-cause notice for the said period and such aspect needs scrutiny to resolve the dispute. 3. In so far as the year 2009-10 is concerned, learned C.A. on behalf of appellant submits that the appellant had issued separate bills for study material for which value thereof shall be excluded from the gross amount for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....exhibited by pages 119 & 120 of the appeal folder, the matter may go back to learned adjudicating authority for verification. 6.2. In so far as the demand of 2009-10 is concerned, Revenue says that no material evidence was brought to appreciate that appellant had issued separate bills in respect of study material to claim exemption under Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. dated 20.6.2003. If appellant satisfies the conditions of notification, the benefit of notification cannot be denied and learned adjudicating authority shall look to that on remand. 6.3. In so far as the demand for the year 2010-11 is concerned, it submitted by learned DR on behalf of Revenue that paragraph 20 of the adjudication order has taken care of the demand and Rev....