Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... vs Mail Enterprises on 18 September, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. Appeal No. ST/191/2008-Mum. (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AKD/81//NGP/08 dated 23/5/2008 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Nagpur ) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President Honble Mr. P.K.Jain, Member (Technical) ============================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see :
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
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?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental :
authorities?
============================================================= Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nagpur :
Appellant VS Mail Enterprises :
Respondent Appearance Shri S.G. Dewalwar, Additional Commissioner (A.R.) for Appellant Shri G.L. Deshpande, Advocate, for respondent CORAM:
Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President
Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical)
Date of hearing : 18/09/2013
Date of decision : 18/09/2013
ORDER NO.
Per : S.S. Kang
Heard both sides.
2. Revenue filed this appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Nagpur.
3. The respondents are providing Industrial Construction Service and paying service tax by availing the benefit of Notification No. 15/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 for payment of duty. The respondents have not taken into consideration the value of free supply material by the principal.
4. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the contention of the respondents that for the purpose of payment of service tax by availing the benefit of Notification No. 15/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 the value of free supply material is not to be taken into consideration.
5. The contention of the revenue in the present appeal is that an explanation by way of Notification No. 4/2005-ST dt. 1.3.2005 was added to Notification No. 15/2004-ST to the effect that for the purpose of Notification No. 15/2004-ST, the gross amount charged shall include the value of goods and materials supplied or provided or used by the provider of the construction service for providing such service.
5. We find that this issue is now settled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. Vs. CST, Delhi in appeal No. ST/247/2008 the Larger Bench of the Tribunal vide order dt. 6.9.2013 held that the value of free supplies by service recipient do not comprise the gross amount charged under notification No.15/2004-ST, including the Explanation thereto as introduced by Notification No. 4/2005-ST. In view of the above decision, we find no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeal is dismissed.
(Dictated in court) .
(P.K. Jain) Member (Technical) (S.S. Kang) Vice President Sm ??
??
??
??
3