9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 17.03.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi, whereby service tax demand of Rs. 7,27,61,579/- was confirmed along with interest. The amount of Rs. 3,85,17,539/- towards service tax liability already deposited by the appellant was appropriated against such adjudged demand. Besides, penalties were im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant appearing for the appellant submits that the services rendered in connection with execution of a composite works contract, involving both supply of materials and rendering of service prior to 01.06.2007 was not liable for payment of service tax in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of CCE, Kerala Vs. - Larsen and Toubro Ltd., reported in 2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.). The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsfer of property in goods and also rendering of service. Thus, the activities undertaken by the appellant pursuant to the contract fall under the category of works contracts service. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Larson and Turbo Ltd. (supra) have held that such contracts are liable to service tax only w.e.f. 01.06.2007, when a new tax entry under the category of "works ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant for execution of the assigned contract. Thus, the benefit of abatement of 67% provided in the Notification Nos. 15/2004 and 1/2006 is available to the appellant. Since, there is no restriction contained in the said notifications that payment of service tax after initiation of investigation by the Department will disentitle the claim of such abatement; we are of the view that denial of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
