9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No.15/2009 (H-I) ST dated 08.12.2009. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the Revenue authorities were of the view that during the period 10.09.2004 to 30.09.2007, appellant had undertaken different works under the category of erection, c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng with the interest thereof and that penalty is correctly imposed. 4. Learned Counsel at the outset submits that they are not contesting the tax liability and they have discharged the same before the issuance of the show cause notice and also on receipt of the Order-in-Appeal. It is the submission that penalties imposed be set aside as appellant had genuine bonafide belief that tax liability wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant could have entertained a bonafide belief that the services rendered by them were under the "works contracts" as they had undertaken various jobs of fabrication, painting of works with the paint purchased by them and paid works contracts tax to the State Government. Hence the entire execution of the contract by them to various customers may have got covered under works contract ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
