BSR ENTERPRISES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) SHRI S. Ignatius, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants states that the adjudicating Commissioner has merely gone by the figures in the Balance Sheet for quantifying the demand of service tax against the appellants. He states that the appellants have supplied parts and other materials to the customers during the course of providing erection, commissioning and installation services which are not includible in the value of the taxable service as per Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994. He states that the appellants should be in a position to furnish all the invoices where the cost of such material has been shown separately. He further states that the claim of the appellants for exemption under, dated 20 -6 -2003 has been denied by the adjudicating Commissioner merely looking at two or three samples instead of examining all the invoices. He further states that part of the demand is time -barred as the appellants had not suppressed any information, and non -mentioning of the material cost in the service tax return was on account of the understanding of the appellants that the value of the same is required to be excluded while computing the service tax. He also cites the decision of the Tribunal in the case of ASL Motors Ltd. v. CCE & Sr, [2008] 17 STT 83 (Kol. -CESTAT) to support the argument that value of material on which sales tax has been paid cannot be charged to service tax.

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides and perusal of the case records including the cited case law, we find that the demand has been quantified merely on the basis of the figures in the Balance Sheet of the appellants. Since the appellants are in a position to submit all the invoices an exercise is required to be undertaken by the adjudicating Commissioner to examine applicability of , dated 20 -6 -2003 in the case of the appellants. Moreover, the claim of the appellants in regard to the question of limitation is also required to be examined in respect of the different services provided by them with reference to the actual disclosures made by them. Hence we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision both on merit and on the question of limitation. He shall allow adequate opportunity to the appellants for hearing and allow them to file the relevant documents including the invoices.