9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces adopting a notional value of 15% of the gross amount realized for the supply and erection of lifts/escalators. On the balance portion of 85%, the appellants discharged VAT. It appeared to the department that such notional adoption of 15% of the gross amount realized is not proper and resulted in short payment of service tax. Hence show cause notice dt. 23.10.2008 was issued for the period 1.8.2007 to 31.03.2008 proposing to recover service tax along with interest and also proposing to impose penalties. The cenvat credit availed to the tune of Rs. 21,29,886/- for the period 08/2007 to 03/2008 was also alleged to be wrongly availed and proposed to be recovered. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand, disallo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct value is correct and proper. The Tribunal had also placed reliance in the case of Safety Retreading Co. P. Ltd. Vs CCE Salem - 2017 (48) STR 97 (SC). 2.2. He submits that w.e.f. 1.6.2007, the value of services in a works contract can be determined in terms of Rule 2A (i) (b) or Rule 2A (ii) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. In the present appeal, it is determined as per Rule 2A (ii) of the said Rules. The authorities cannot compel and force the assessee to accept the notification and avail abatement as per Notification No.1/2006-ST dt.1.3.2006. To support this point, he placed reliance on the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of G.D.Builders Vs UOI - 2013-TIOL-908-HC-DEL-ST. 2.3 The cenvat credit to the tu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x on 85% of the value of the contract. Thus, the entire contract has been subjected to VAT/Service Tax. It is the contention of the department that appellants ought to discharge service tax on 33% of the gross amount charged being the liability under the service tax law. Rule 2A(ii) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 as reproduced above, shows that the value adopted for the purpose of payment of VAT shall be taken as the value of transfer of proper in goods involved in the section of works contract for determining eth value of works contract service. Since the appellant has paid service tax on 15% of the contract value and has discharged VAT on the remaining portion, we are of the view that any differential service tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
