2013 (12) TMI 919

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plicant is engaged in the business of construction of residential complex. They were selling the undivided portion of the land to the prospective buyers of the flats and registering such undivided portion of the land in the name of the prospective buyer. Thereafter, flats were constructed for prospective buyers. During the period October 2008 to June 2010, the applicant did not pay any service tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, the demand is not sustainable in such a matter involving interpretation of law. She also submits that for an earlier period from 2005-08, show-cause notice was issued invoking the extended period and therefore subsequent show-cause notice invoking extended period is not maintainable. 3. She further submits that they have paid an amount of Rs.3.44 lakhs and it has been appropriated in the order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hy the Department was not able to issue notice in time. On this fact there was a mis-representation of facts. He submits that the taxability of the service in such situation was decided by the Tribunal in the case of LCS City Makers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai 2013 (30) STR 33. 5. We have considered arguments from both sides. Considering the final decision given in the case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X