Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

3 vs Unknown on 23 June, 2008

        

 
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
West Zonal Bench, O-20, Meghani Nagar, Ahmedabad

COURT-II

 Date of hearing:23.6.2008

Service Tax Appeal Nos.31, 43, 44 of 2008

Arising out of the order in  appeal No.368/2007/Commr(A)/Raj dated 18.1.2.2007 and 17 to 18/2008/Commr(A)/Raj dated 25.1.2008 passed by the Commissioner , Central Excise (Appeals), Rajkot.

For Approval and Signature:

Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical)


1
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
 
3
Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
	
Appellants						                    		Respondent
Reliance Industries Limited 			vs.			       C.C.E.,
											       Rajkot
Appearance:

Shri J.C. Patel,  Advocate  for the appellants and

Dr. M.K. Rajak, Authorized Departmental Representative (SDR) for the Revenue Coram: Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical) Order No.____________________ Per Archana Wadhwa:

All the three appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they involved identical issue. The demand stands confirmed against the appellants on the ground that reimbursable charges incurred by the appellants for traveling allowances to consulting engineers are required to be included in the fees for services so paid by them, for the purpose of service tax. We find that the issue is no more res integra and stands settled by the following decisions of the Tribunal:
a) Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.S.T., Bangalore  2007 (5) STR 118 (Tri-Bang.)
b) Malabar Management Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.S.T.,Chennai  2008 (9) STR 483 (Tri-Chennai)
c) M/s Autobindo Pharma Ltd. vs. C.C.E.& Customs, Visakhapatnam  2008  TIOL  679  CESTAT  Bang.

2. We also find that the Board vide its Service Tax instructions F.No.B..43/5/97-TRU, dated 2.7.97 held in para 3.5 that the expenses incurred on account of reimbursable expenses shall not form part of the value of the taxable services. To the same effect is another instruction being Service Tax F.No.B11/98-TRU, dated 7.10.98.

3. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals with consequential relief to the appellant(s).

(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) (B.S.V. Murthy) Member (Technical) scd/ 3