9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by DGCEI at the office of the appellant and certain documents were recovered vide Panchnama dated 25.02.2013. It was noticed that the appellant did not take into consideration the quantum of sundry debtors for assessment of Service Tax in the respective ST-3 returns. Apart from this, the book adjustment of certain payments against sale of flat by the Noticee was not taken into consideration for calculation of service tax. Further the area of the flats exceeds 2000 Sq. ft. therefore, in view of amended Notification 02/2013-ST dated 01.03.2013 (as existed during the relevant period), the Noticee were eligible for abatement of 70% instead of 75% on sale of any unit under construction which exceeds 2000 Sq. ft. in area or Rs. 1.00 Crore for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as held:- "I find that the Appellant has reproduced the legal provisions in this regard but failed to establish with supporting documents regarding the amount of advance booking was refunded." But it is observed that record bears relevant documents with compiled details as: Krishna Developers Refund Details Sl.No. 2011-2012 Date of Receipts Amount Tax Rate of Tax Date of Refund Amount Name of Party 1 Ajay Jain 02.09.11 400000 10041 2.575 21.11.11 400000 2 Fairdeal International 02.04.11 500000 12552 2.575 21.02.12 500000 3. Ankit Mangle 26.05.11 1000000 25104 2.575 31.03.12 1000000 4 Anjay Badjatya 15.10.11 250000 6276 2.575 14.11.11 250000 Total 2150000 53973 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund the same. The adjudicating authorities are of the opinion that there is no evidence about the said refund (as mentioned above). Also that the amount of credit to be taken was supposed to be shown separately in return form instead of adjusting the same with gross amount of taxable service. But not only from the documents of the appellant but from department's own SCN, it is clear that whatever was the alleged difference between consolidated gross amount received (including sundry debtors against booking) and taxable receipts declared by the appellant in their ST-3 returns for the year 2010-11 to 2012-13 was an account of refunds amounting to Rs. 21,50,000/- and Rs. 47,25.000/- which were directly deducted from the gross value. The pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
