TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT] and M/s. Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (9) TMI 1149 - CESTAT CHENNAI] relied upon by her. Thus, when the service performed is Works Contract Service for the entire period covered by the impugned order, the demand of service tax under ‘Construction of Residential Complex’ instead will only serve to vitiate the proceedings ab initio - the entire demand canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 under the service tax category of Construction of Residential Complex . The Original Authority confirmed the tax liability of ₹ 24,14,726/- with interest thereon, appropriated an amount of ₹ 20,80,038/- paid up by the assessee and imposed penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2.2.1 In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned Order No. 69/2012-ST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee were supplying both materials and labour and therefore, has calculated the tax liability after giving an abatement of 67%. Since the Show Cause Notice has been issued only under Construction of Residential Complex Service , in view of the judgement of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Customs Vs. M/s. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. reported in 2015 (8) T.M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vered by the case laws of M/s. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. (supra) and M/s. Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (supra) relied upon by her. Thus, when the service performed is Works Contract Service for the entire period covered by the impugned order, the demand of service tax under Construction of Residential Complex instead will only serve to vitiate the proceedings ab initio in view of the ratio la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
