TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 678
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....djudication, service tax demand of Rs.1,15,73,087/- stands confirmed against the applicant along with interest and penalties. Aggrieved by the order, the applicant has filed an appeal along with a stay petition seeking waiver of predeposit of dues arising from the impugned order. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the demand is based on amounts shown as receipts in their bank accounts which included amounts like those being credited on maturity of fixed deposits and therefore the demand is not worked out correctly. 3. In all these projects the applicant had entered into joint development agreements with the land owners. On construction of the building, agreed area of each of the constructed area of each project was hand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as no service involved in the arrangement between the applicant and the land owner. 7. He also strongly contested the method by which the Department has valued the service rendered to the land owner. The Department has taken the value of the flat/constructed area sold by the applicant to independent buyers as the basis for arriving at the value of construction service rendered to the land owner. He submits that the applicant does not realize such value for the service rendered to the land owner. The only consideration that he receives is undivided share of the land which the applicant can sell to prospective customers. The value at which the applicant sells the constructed area to independent buyers will be higher because he has to fully r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cted area was handed over to the persons to whom undivided shares of land were sold. There was no sale of the constructed flat or shop. Therefore, he submits that it is very clear that the construction activity was undertaken on the land already registered in the name of the client and therefore service was being provided by the applicant to such clients. He submits that the clarification issued by CBEC was applicable only in cases where the constructed flats or shops were being sold and were registered for sale. 9. He also submits that the example of theatre owner and film distributor is not applicable to the present situation where each person was taking risk for an uncertain profit. In the present case there is service rendered for an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....od of payment of service tax liability for these services. The new entry used the same expressions as were used in the previous entries. The previous entries also provided for appropriate abatement for value of goods and material involved in providing such services. Further, he submits that in the decision in the case of Turbotech Precision Engg. (supra) he dispute was about erection and commissioning and that decision has been appealed by the Department. However, it is to be noted that in the case of erection and commission, if it is decided that if the contract cannot be vivisected, it will be perceived as a case of supply of machines but in the case of construction activity if the contract cannot be vivisected the nature of the activity ....