TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of levy of service tax, on the services in question the terms of the contract vis-a-vis the judgements delivered which were relied upon by appellant needs to be considered. However the adjudicating authority has not properly examined the facts/ terms of the contract and he has not seen the light of the judgements given subsequently on the identical issue. Therefore, the entire matter needs a relook and to be decided a fresh. The appeal is allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order. - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Jigar Shah Shri Amber Kumrawat Advocate for the Appellant Shri Rajesh Nathan, Assistant Commissioner(AR) for the Responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, on the basis of principal of accretion the activity is not taxable. (V) Construction of residential quarters undertaken by the appellant for Rajkot Municipal Corporation, Surat Municipal Corporation, Vadodara Municipal Corporation and Jaitpur Navgadh Nagarpalika is not taxable under construction of complex service . (VI) Construction of residential unit undertaken for Municipal Corporations and Nagarpalika, as the same is covered under Jawaharlal National Urban Renewal Mission (JJNURM) is not liable to service tax. (VII) Appellant is not liable to pay Service Tax for the work undertaken for Bhavnagar Energy Company Ltd (BECL) under the head of construction of complex service . As the same is not for commercial or industr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completely ignored the submissions made by the appellant before him and confirmed the huge demand. Therefore, he violated the principles of natural justice. 3. Shri Rajesh Nathan, Learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both the sides and perusal of record, we find that the appellant have raised various grounds before us, submitting that the demand of service tax is not sustainable. 4.1 We find that some of the vital submission made before this Tribunal but neither raised before the Adjudicating Authority nor considered by the Adjudicating Authority. Moreover, the case pertains to the period 2007-08 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
