2018 (2) TMI 1122

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Appellants Shri R K Manjhi, AR - for the Respondent ORDER Per: (Dr.) Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No.328/ 2011 dated 4.8.2011. 2. Heard Ms Rink Arora and Shri R K Manjhi, learned Counsels for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3. The first issue to be decided in the instant case is demand of service tax of Rs. 6,60,859/- pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... HNGIL had contributed to such funds, the amount towards the workmen deployed by the appellant. The fact is not under dispute that such contributed amount was never given by such service receiver to the appellant. Thus, the gross value for the computation of service tax liability in the hands of the appellant will not take into consideration the amount of contribution made by the service receiver ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....served that "they are a part of the manufacturing process and the value of the packaging is included in the assessable value of the goods and excise duity is paid on the entire value taking into account the charges incurred by the manufacturers for the package. Therefore, once the Excise duty is paid on the charges, again the service tax cannot be levied." 7. She also relied on the Board Circula....