9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Suchitra Sharma, D.R. ORDER PER R.K. SINGH: Stay application along with appeal has been filed against order-in-original dated 16.12.2013 in terms of which service tax demand of Rs. 69,08,552/- was confirmed under ECIS for the period October 209 to March 2010 along with interest and penalties. 2. The appellant has contended that: (i) It was a manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore it was not even liable to pay service tax. In effect thus whatever credit it took has been reversed by payment of that much amount of service tax. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, stated that the appellant was liable to pay service tax by including the value of towers and as the value was not included abatement of 67% under Notification No. 1/2006-ST was not admissible and therefore the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther service provider, generally known as sub-contractor. Service tax is paid by the service provider for the total work. In such cases, whether service tax is liable to be paid by the service provider known as sub-contractor who undertakes only part of the whole work. A sub-contractor is essentially a taxable service provider. The fact that services provided by such sub-contractor are used by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Cenvat credit of service tax (paid by sub-contractor) taken by it (i.e. the appellant) when service tax paid by it (appellant) was not less than such credit taken. 5. In the light of the foregoing analysis and having regard to the fact that as against the demand of Rs. 69,08,552/- an amount of Rs. 23,39,742/- has been remitted, we do not order any further pre-deposit and stay recovery of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
