Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 78 - AT - Service TaxValidity of SCN - demand confirmed under Construction of complex service whereas the nature of activity carried out by the appellant was in the nature of “works contract” - Nature of advance receipt - HELD THAT:- It was not permissible for the Revenue to issue a notice demanding service tax under “construction of complex services” as defined under section 65 (105) (zzzh) of the Finance Act, 1994 when the nature of activity was of “works contract” - a demand of service tax under a particular category could not have been confirmed under a different category - the demand of service tax could not have been confirmed under “works contract” when the show cause notice was issued under “construction of complex services”. Benefit of advances from the taxable values of service tax - rejection for the reason that the taxable value of service provided by the party did not tally with the balance sheet figures and, therefore, service tax liability was required to be calculated as per the balance sheet figures available on record - HELD THAT:- No reason has been assigned by the Principal Commissioner as to why the certificate of the Chartered Accountant was not accepted. It is clear that instead of considering the actual advances received during a particular year, the Principal Commissioner has computed taxable value on the closing balance of advances as appearing in the balance sheets. Learned Representative for the assessee has stated that under this head excess demand of ₹ 3,49,553/- due to inclusion of advances has to be set aside and, therefore, the rest of the demand of ₹ 8,69,022/- can be confirmed. There are force in the contention of the learned Representative of the assessee. The excess demand of ₹ 3,49,553/- due to inclusion of advances is set aside. Appeal allowed in part.
|