Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 454 - AT - Service TaxWorks Contract Scheme - Appellant has failed to file any letter indicating their option to opt for Composition Scheme - time limitation - HELD THAT:- This Bench in the case of M/S HEAVY ENGINEERING CORPORATION LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST & EXCISE, RANCHI [2023 (3) TMI 1393 - CESTAT KOLKATA] has held Admittedly, no demand has been made for the period prior to 01.06.2007 under the “Works Contract Service”. Therefore, the demand of service tax from the appellants does not survive prior to 01.06.2007 - Therefore, the demand for the period October 2005 to 31/5/2007 is set aside. The Appellant would be eligible for consequential relief, if any, as per law. Demand for the period 01/06/2007 to March 2010 - Time limitation - HELD THAT:- The Appellant has been paying the Service Tax under the category of “Works Contract” under Composition Scheme and reflecting the same in the ST-3 Returns. The Department did not raise any query about the same till the present Show Cause Notice was issued on 08/2/2010 - Admittedly, the Appellant’s main business is to supply the Fire Equipment and erect and Commissioning the same in the premises. Therefore factually it gets proved that they were providing Works Contract Service only. If the Appellant is not paying VAT on the same, it is for the VAT Authority to take proper action against them. This cannot be the basis for confirmation of the demand by the Service Tax Authorities. Therefore, the confirmed demand on account of “Works Contract”, wherein the benefit of composition was not given, is also required to be set aside on account of limitation. No penalties are to be imposed. In case, any excess Service Tax has been paid by the Appellant, the same is required to be refunded as per statutory provisions. Appeal disposed off.
|