Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Cherry Hill Interiors Ltd. Versus C.S. T-Delhi

2015 (9) TMI 161 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Commercial or industrial construction service - abatement of 67% under notification 15/2004 ST/notification No. 1/2006-ST - Held that:- benefit of the said notification (no. 12/2003-ST) can be extended only if the appellant satisfies the conditions subject to which the benefit thereunder can be granted. CESTAT has held in the case of Mehta Plastcorporation [2014 (9) TMI 178 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] that to claim exemption under notification 12/2003-ST it is not necessary that invoices should separate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Nos. ST/426,427/2009 and ST/3945/2012-CU[DB] - Final Order No. 52137-52139/2015 - Dated:- 12-6-2015 - Ashok Jindal, Member (J) And R. K. Singh, Member (T),JJ. For the Appellant : Shri S K Pahwa, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Amreesh Jain, DR ORDER Per: R K Singh: This order is in respect of Service Tax Appeals Nos. 426-427/2009 and 3945/2012. In respect of appeal No. ST/426/2009 demand of ₹ 4,65,88,061/- along with interest and penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act 1994 was confirmed vi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ervice tax demand of ₹ 4,76,461/- for the period April, 2008 to Sept, 2008 was confirmed under construction service along with interest and penalties and a demand of ₹ 2,68,218/- was confirmed on account of denial of adjustment of service tax paid in excess on the ground that it was done without following the proper procedure as required under Rule 6 (1 A) of the Service Tax Rules. The impugned demands under construction service were confirmed on the ground that the appellant provide .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re either bought or taken on lease and required undertaking woodwork, panelling, partition, provisioning of fixed and loose furniture and storage, provisioning of blinds and plastering of walls, relaying of floors etc etc. It contended that the services were beyond mere competition and finishing services and therefore, it was entitled to 67% abatement under the aforesaid notifications. Alternatively, the appellant stated that it was entitled to the benefit of notification No. 12/2003-ST in respe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hing service as is also evident from the statement of its manager (finance) Praveen Kumar and also from the nature of work done by it, and therefore, it was not entitled to 67% abatement under notification No. 15/2004 or 1/2006. He, however, conceded that the appellant would be entitled to the benefit of notification No. 12/ 2003-S.T in respect of the material supplied in the course of rendering of impugned service provided it is able to satisfy the conditions of the said notification. 4. We hav .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t it was providing various interior services such as wooden & metal partition, plastering, painting, civil work, joinery items, floor & wall tiling and other similar services in respect of building or civil structure or part thereof. The item rates in the work-orders were inclusive of cost of material. In the light of the type of activities which are covered under the scope of completion and finishing services as per the definition quoted above, there hardly remains any doubt that the se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

extended in the wake of the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of GD Builders versus union of India 2013(32)STR673(Del). Also, CESTAT in the case of Raj furnitures2014-TIOL-2267-Del has held that the appellant cannot be disallowed to claim the benefit of notification No. 12/2003-ST and the same can be claimed by it even at this stage. However, the benefit of the said notification (no. 12/2003-ST) can be extended only if the appellant satisfies the conditions subject to which the benefit t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version