Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 17 - AT - Service TaxCommercial or Industrial Construction Service - Composite contracts - Construction of office buildings and erection of transmission towers and other associated structures - HELD THAT:- For the period 01.06.2007, the demand will not in any case sustain in the light of the decision in the case of COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS VERSUS M/S LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD. AND OTHERS [2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT] - For the period after 01.06.2007, the ratio laid down by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of V. CHINNASAMY, A. ELANGO, VEE VEE CONSTRUCTIONS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, TRICHY [2018 (5) TMI 986 - CESTAT CHENNAI] relied upon by the learned advocate is applicable on all fours in respect of Construction Services provided by the appellant. For the period after 01.06.2007, the demand invoking the extended period of limitation with respect to Works Contract Service cannot sustain and will require to be set aside - the appellant will be liable to pay service tax for the normal period of limitation calculated from the date of issue of the show-cause notice. However, for the same reasons no penalty will be imposable under section 78 ibid for the normal period. Demand with regard to Cleaning Services - HELD THAT:- Ld. Advocate has conceded the tax liability. We do not therefore interfere with the demand of tax and interest - the penalty under section 78 ibid on this score also is unjustified - penalty imposed under section 77 ibid upheld. Appeal allowed in part.
|