Valuation

CESTAT, CHENNAI BENCH

M. M. Colour Labs

v.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore

P. G. Chacko, Judicial Member

Final Order No. 1320 of 2007

Stay Order No. 1066 of 2007

Application No. S/PD/24 of 2007

Appeal No. S/34 of 2007

November 2, 2007

Section 67 read with section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 - Valuation of taxable service for charging service tax - Assessee was rendering photography service and paid service tax on amount collected from its clients as consideration for service - Department demanded differential amount of service tax from assessee on ground that cost of materials employed for the purpose of rendering service should also had been added to ‘gross amount’ under section 67 - Demand was confirmed by adjudicating authority along with interest and penalty - Appeal against said demand was dismissed by Commissioner (Appeals) for non-compliance with pre-deposit direction under section 35f of Central Excise Act, 1944 - However in a similar case in Indian Arts Bureau v. CST [2007] [Final Order Nos. 186 to 189/SONO. 236 to 239 (Chennai) of 2006 dated 1-3-2007 in which appeal filed by assessee against original authority’s decision was rejected for want of pre-deposit, Tribunal on finding prima-facie case in favour of assessee, directed Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision without insisting on pre-deposit - Whether following above decision impugned order was to be set aside and matter was to be remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) with a direction to take a decision on merits without insisting on any pre-deposit - Held, yes [Para 4]