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. Shrijan Builders Versus C.C.E & S.T. Raipur

Demand - construction of residential complex services - Held that: - For the period 01.07.2010 to 31.03.2012, it is seen that the appellant on being pointed by the officers immediately discharged their tax liability along with interest. In as much as the issue of taxability was the subject matter of the Hon’ble High court of Bombay whereas the vires of the same was challenged it can be safely concluded that there was confusion in respect of the taxability of the same. In such a scenario the prov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-. I do not find any merit in the appellant’s plea of bonafide in respect of the said amount in as much as having collected the same in the name of the revenue and having retained the same, definitely reflects upon appellant’s intention of enriching themselves at the cost of Revenue. - While upholding the confirmation of the said demand along with interest, I am of the view that the appellant needs to be penalized on the said count. The penalty of ₹ 10,000/- imposed by the lower author .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

period 01.07.2010 - 31.03.2012 along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalty. In addition, an amount of ₹ 1,52,712/- stands confirmed for the period prior to 01.07.2010, when the same was collected by the appellant from the consumers but was not deposited with the Revenue. 2. The appellants are engaged and registered with the Department for providing services under the category of construction of residential complex and real estate agent services. Enquiry was initiated agai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by them along with interest of ₹ 1,02,722/-. 3. Consequently a show cause notice was issued to them on 26.12.2012 proposing to confirm the service tax along with interest and imposition of penalties. The said show cause notice culminated into an order passed by the original adjudicating authority and upheld by commissioner (A). Hence the present appeal. 4. I have heard Shri Pankaj Sethi, CA for the Applicants and Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the Respondent. 5. The appellant s main grievance is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cution of the sale date is in the nature of self services and would not attract service tax. The liability was fixed on the builders w.e.f. 01.06.2010 and the constitutional validity of the same was challenged before the Hon ble High Court of Bombay, who upheld the same in the case of Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry Vs. UOI-2012 (25) STR 305 (Bom.). As such it is their contention that there was confusion in the field and it was it was on that account that tax was not been paid. As regard .....

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