2020 (3) TMI 756

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mar, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER Per : Mr. Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand has been confirmed under Rule 6 (3) of CCR, 2004. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a registered contractor and providing Works Contract Service. During the course of Audit for the period April 2014 to March 2015, it was obser....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the appellant is providing taxable services i.e. works contract service, therefore, the provision of Rule 6 (3) of CCR, 2004 are not applicable to them as the said provision is applicable when the assessee is providing taxable as well as exempted services and is not maintaining separate account of inputs and input ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es two classes of goods, namely :- (i) non-exempted goods removed; (ii) exempted goods removed; or (b) a provider of output service who provides two classes of services, namely:- (i) non-exempted services; (ii) exempted services, shall follow any one of the following options applicable to him, namely :- (i) pay an amount equal to six per cent. of value of the exempted goods....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ces wherein the appellant is providing two distinct transaction one by way of a taxable service and another by way of an exempted service under Rule 2(e). Rule 6 doesn't become applicable in respect of the same taxable service where the part of it is being exempted by way of any notification issued which exempts certain portion of value of the same taxable service provided by the appellant. ....