TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 766X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... work orders produced, we do not find any such claim made by the appellant suggests that they are only undertaking interior works. Our attention also was drawn to one of the work orders wherein the work done by the appellant was certified by an interior decorator which also would show that the appellant may not be considered as an interior decorator. If they were considered to be so and their servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hile paying the Service Tax, they treated the service as works contract and were paying tax on that basis from November, 2007 to September, 2011. Taking a view that the appellant is not eligible for the abatement of 67% composition scheme as the case may be during the relevant period if they were considered as interior decorators, proceedings were initiated which has culminated in confirmation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided to any person, by an interior decorator in relation to planning, design or beautification of spaces, whether manmade or otherwise, in any manner. 4.4 I opine from the above definition that the phrase in any other manner qualifies the provision of services and not the specified fields of advice, or consulting, or technical assistance. I opine that this phrase had apparently been inserted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be a professional and has to advertise himself to the public that he is an interior decorator. From the bills and work orders produced, we do not find any such claim made by the appellant suggests that they are only undertaking interior works. Our attention also was drawn to one of the work orders wherein the work done by the appellant was certified by an interior decorator which also would show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y them, the information contained in ST-3 returns and other aspects will have to be considered which can be done only at the time of final hearing. At this stage, we consider that in view of the fact that the classification itself is debatable and the appellant seem to have a prima facie case to show that they are not interior decorators, the requirement of pre-deposit is waived and stay against r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
