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 →

M/s. JR Construction Co. Versus C.C.E. &S. T., Jaipur-I

2016 (2) TMI 646 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Demand of service tax was confirmed on the ground that the appellant had provided “Commercial or Industrial Construction Service” (CICS), “Maintenance and Repair Service”, and “Site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolish Service” to Giral Lignite Thermal Power Project during the period 08.06.2005 to 17.10.2008 but did not pay service tax on the gross amount received from the service recipient.

Held that:- it is evident that the appellant was not unjustified .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r Bench of CESTAT in the case of L&T - In these circumstances, it is not possible to sustain the allegation of wilful misstatement / suppression of facts on the part of the appellant. - Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assesee. - Application No. ST/STAY/50042/2014-CU[DB] In Appeal No.ST/50037/2014-CU[DB] - Final Order No.52553/2015 - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - MR. G. RAGHURAM, PRESIDENT AND MR. R.K. SINGH, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Petitioner : Shri Narendra Singhvi, Advocate For the Respondent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the appellant had provided Commercial or Industrial Construction Service (CICS), Maintenance and Repair Service , and Site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolish Service to Giral Lignite Thermal Power Project during the period 08.06.2005 to 17.10.2008 but did not pay service tax on the gross amount received from the service recipient. 2. The appellant has contended that (i) it has not been given 67% abatement under notification No. 15/2004-ST on the ground that th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

prior to that date, (iii) works contracts were taxable by the state governments and were not liable to service tax prior to 01.06.2007 and therefore it had not taken registration as it was under a bona fide belief that composite (works) contracts were not taxable prior to 01.06.2007, (iv) there was no suppression or wilful misstatement and the entire demand was time-barred 3. The ld. Departmental Representative reiterated the contentions contained in the impugned order adding that not indicating .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing as to how much demand pertains to each of them. However even if the non-identification of the components of the impugned demand under each of the services under which the impugned demand is confirmed is not taken to be fatal, the fact remains that the appellant right from the very beginning including at the time of adjudication by the primary adjudicating authority has been strongly pleading that the service was rendered under composite (works) contracts on which it paid works contract tax 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