TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver and above the sale deed - Held that:- The explanation clause included in the definition of construction of complex services will cover the said amount and appellant is liable to pay service tax. It is brought to notice that they had paid the entire service tax liability along with interest - since, the issue involved in this case was being litigated and appellant would have entertained a bonafide belief that tax liability need not be discharged, the provisions of Sec.73(3) could be made applicable to the situation in hand and penalties need to be set aside - demand set aside. Demand of ₹ 1,73,17,823/- - Held that:- The issue involved in this case is regarding the amounts notionally attributed as consideration to the area shared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to the land owner in a tripartite agreement. Show cause notice was adjudicated and by impugned order, demands raised were confirmed along with interest and penalties are imposed. This order is in challenge. 3. Learned counsel submits that as regards the demand of ₹ 37,65,110/- for the period 2008-09 to 2012-13, the Order-in-Original itself accepts that for the period prior to 07.07.2010, demand is of ₹ 10,91,396/- for which the activity of construction of residential premises is outside the scope of taxable services on the amounts received over and above the sale deed. He relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Chandigarh Vs UB Constructions Pvt Ltd [2013 (32) STR 738] seeking to set aside the demands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gth by both sides and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is in three parts which we decide as under: I. Demand of ₹ 10,91,396/- on the amounts received over and above the sale deed value for rendering construction of complex services prior to 01.07.2010. On perusal of records, it is noticed that this demand of service tax liability is for the period 2008-09 to 2009-10 up to 30.06.2010. We find strong force in the submissions made by the learned counsel that identical issue has been decided by the Principal Bench in Delhi in the case of UB Constructions Pvt Ltd wherein in Para 5 6 the Bench, following the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner for the construction undertaken on development basis. We find that identical issue has been decided by this Bench in the case of Vasantha Green Projects and Om Sree Builders Developers and others (cited as in above). 7. In the case in hand also we find that Chartered Accountants have given a detailed Certificate as to the inclusion of the value of the amounts attributed to the value of the lands has been considered in addition to the value that is to be charged to the flat owners who purchased the flats from the appellant. Since, identical issue is already decided by this Bench, we find no reason to deviate from such a view already taken. Accordingly, demand on this point also is unsustainable. Demands are set aside and consequentl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
