TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1540X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicable rate (without abatement) and where the value charged was inclusive of material used and consumed in rendering the services, abatement was claimed. There is no doubt that the work orders were for up-keeping of lawns parks with material, i.e. supply of manures (goat difng/compost khad), pesticides, insecticides, flower pots in different sizes, grass cutting machine, plastic pipes, plants etc. These are the items on which no sales tax is payable, however, the Thermal Power Station deducted TDS under Works Contract Tax (WCT) as per Sales Tax/VAT Rules, thus, the abatement was claimed only on the value of services on which TDS under WCT Rules was deducted. Copies of work orders etc. in relation to maintenance and up-keeping of lawns parks. The demand of ₹ 22,36,44/ has been confirmed without appreciating the relevant documents and rather in self despite the adjudicating as is discussed above. The adjudicating authority has also observed that the difference in Tax liability is mostly on account of calculation by availing abatement, whereas it was not admissible to them. The mistake of the Appellant for short declaration of tax liability is rather held to be a bona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1998. Finally, holding that the Appellant has failed to make a true declaration, the same was also proposed to be rejected. 3. While adjudicating the said show cause notice, though the VCES declaration of the Appellant as was filed on 16-12-2013 was not rejected. However, the demand of ₹ 2,23,644/- out of the proposed demand was confirmed along with the imposition of penalty under Section 78 and the demand of interest under Section 75. Still being aggrieved of the order that the Appellant is before this Tribunal. 4. We have heard Mr. Vijay Kumar, Learned Advocate for the Appellant and Mr. R.K. Majhi, Authorised Representative of the department. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the Appellant that the services as were provided by the Appellants were mainly to the local authorities as that of RRVUNL, RSAMB etc. i.e. to such authorities as are not existing for commerce/profits. The said services not being liable to tax, their VCES depositing an amount of ₹ 5,27,916/- on 16-12-2013 was absolutely correct. In terms Section 107(1) of Chapter VI of Finance Act, 2013 read with Rule IV of Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icating authority below has done a meticulous year-wise calculation about the liability of the Appellant w.e.f. the year 2008-2009 till the year 2012-2013. The nature and extent of service rendered has duly been summarised along with the amount receipt for rendering those services. It is after the said meticulous exercise that the proposal of recovery of ₹ 21,98,813/- has been considered only to the extent of ₹ 2,23,644/-. There is no apparent infirmity as is alleged by the Appellant who himself had failed to provide the relevant documents to further assess the adjudicating authority for the submissions to be considered. Justifying the impugned order, appeal is prayed to be dismissed. 8. After hearing both the Parties and perusing the entire record of the appeal as well as the order under challenge, we observe and hold as follows : 8.1 The adjudicating authority after examining various documents submitted by the Appellant for the period of demand has summarised the nature of the services rendered and the respective amount receipt by the Appellant and concluded that ₹ 6,79,196/- pertains to the road work to Nagar Nigam and PWD, ₹ 12,29,782/- pertains to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of services received for maintenance and up-keeping of lawns parks in Thermal Colony. The reason for such denial given by the Commissioner is that the services are classifiable under management, provision of abatement on account of providing these services including pesticides, insecticides, manure and plants. Further, they have not charged the separate value of these items in the contract. Furthermore, the Learned Commissioner has observed that the appellant has declared these services taxable as per their wishes; in some cases they have declared full taxable value at the rate applicable, whereas in some cases, they have claimed abatement without any legal backing. But from the documents on record we observe that he Learned Commissioner has failed to appreciate the honesty of the appellant that wherever the value of services were not inclusive of material used or consumed, appellant declared the tax payable at full applicable rate (without abatement) and where the value charged was inclusive of material used and consumed in rendering the services, abatement was claimed. There is no doubt that the work orders were for up-keeping of lawns parks with material, i.e. supply of m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 08-09 3901532 3901532 482230 0 0 0 2009-10 1104712 1104712 113785 0 0 0 The present investigation got initiated based on Income Tax data about taxable amount for respective year as received on account of services relating to road, tube well/bore well/submersible pump and private house, which are exempt. It proves beyond doubt that the taxable value in FYs 2008-09 2009-10 was Zero. Thus, for considering the admissibility of exemption for the FY 2010-11 the taxable turnover of FY 2009-10 was to be considered, which was ZERO. Therefore, appellant was entitled for the exemption from payment of service tax on the entire value of taxable turnover was ₹ 9,68,467/- in the FY 2010-11. 12. The requisite certificate is also on record, thus we are of the opinion that the demand of ₹ 22,36,44/ has been confirmed without appreciating the relevant documents and rather in self despite the adjudicating as is discussed above. The adjudicating authority has also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
