TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were registered with the department and were discharging service tax under the category of Construction service. The proceedings initiated now are to re-classify the service under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Service - the appellants were registered with the department and discharging service tax under a different category of service. There can be no allegation of fraud, collusion or willful mistake to invoke the extended period. We find that the demand, if any, should be limited to a normal period under the category of Works Contract as claimed and admitted by the appellant - no penalty shall be leviable on the appellant and appellants are rightly eligible for waiver of penalties under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Excise officers directed the appellants to register under Commercial or Industrial Services and Maintenance and Repair Services . The appellant voluntarily deposited the service tax with effect from 23.01.2007, treating the services under the category of Commercial Construction Services availing abatement under Notification No. 15/2004-ST and 1/2006-ST. They have fulfilled the conditions of the said notifications. The composite work contract is liable to service tax only with effect from 01.06.2007 as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner vs. Larsen Toubro Limited - 2015 (39) STR 913 (SC) . Further, the ld. Counsel submitted that the appellant were registered with the department and deposited the service tax. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssue involved with reference to tax liability of contract has been the subject matter of dispute and litigation. The matter was finally resolved by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Larsen Toubro Limited (supra) . Having examined the facts of the present case, we find that the appellants were registered with the department and discharging service tax under a different category of service. On the basis of facts recorded by the lower authorities, we find that in this case, there can be no allegation of fraud, collusion or willful mistake to invoke the extended period. We find that the demand, if any, should be limited to a normal period under the category of Works Contract as claimed and admitted by the appellant. On the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
