2016 (6) TMI 832

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Appellant : Ms. Rinki Arora, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Rajeev Gupta, D.R. ORDER Stay application alongwith appeal has been filed against Order-in-original No. -JAI-EXCUS-001-COM-073-13-14 dated 31.10.2013 in terms of which service tax demand of Rs. 1,28,99,460/- was confirmed for the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2012 alongwith interest and penalties.  2.  Ld. Advocate for the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y engaged by RSRDC and therefore the exclusion clause under COCS[65(105)(zzzh)] is not applicable and cited CBEC clarification in that regard. (ii) the said so called Daramsala was used for various commercial purposes including marriage purpose etc. and therefore its construction cannot be outside the scope of CICS. (iii)  Regarding KHTPL he said that the company was only for commerce and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t tried to make out an arguable case that is was for non-commercial purpose.  However, M/s KHTPL is a commercial organization and so it is also arguable that its building was for business or commerce.  5.  In the light of the analysis above and keeping in view the appellant's contention that the demand is time barred, we are of the view that a pre-deposit of Rs. 10.00 Lakhs within .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X