9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 015 dated 25.03.2015 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Coimbatore upholding the Order-in-Original No. 75/2014 dated 17.12.2014 which confirmed the demand of Service Tax and imposed penalties under relevant provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 (ACT). 2. Facts briefly stated are that the Appellants were rendering taxable services under the Category of Commercial or Industrial Construction Services and Construction of Residential Complex Service. Alleging non-payment of service tax on the gross amounts received by the Appellant for two of their residential projects during the period from October 2011- June 2012, the department issued a Statement of demand dated 01.10.2013 proposing to demand service tax of Rs.9,33,959/- under Construction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 28.03.2013 and the matter was decided by the Tribunal vide its Final Order No. 40236/2023 dt 31.03.2023 in ST/42192/2013 wherein the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for submission of supporting documents to prove that the activities were in the nature of works contracts. Accordingly, the appellants in the denovo proceedings submitted all the documents, and after verification of the same, the adjudicating authority had vide Order in Original No. 2/2024-ST(ADC) Denova dt 26.06.2024 held that the demand of service tax would not survive, hence dropped the demand of Rs 28,84,945/-. As the earlier demands for the same projects have been dropped by the lower authorities, it was averred that the present demand under Statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prospective buyer, followed by a construction agreement whereby the appellant would construct a residential unit as per the specifications and conditions in the construction agreement, which stands aloof and excluded from construction of residential complex service. 2.2 It was also submitted that the appellant was a builder and that the builders became liable to Service Tax with effect from 01.07.2010 with the introduction of the Explanation to Section 65(105)(zzzh) of the Finance Act, 1994 and hence, there was no tax liability on the appellant for the period up to 01.07.2010. 2.3 It was also urged that the activities they undertook were in the nature of works contract as it involved the sale of materials also and hence, the same would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant would fall under works contract service and obviously, the above is for want of supporting documentary evidences. 3.3 Before us also, we find that the appellant has only taken the ground that the scope of their activity was covered under the definition of 'works contract' service as they had rendered construction service apart from selling materials used for the construction. 4. We are unable to appreciate the approach of the appellant since they have not only failed in furnishing supporting documents along with their defence before the Original Authority, but also failed to do so even when they filed their first appeal before the First Appellate Authority. When the facts are not properly placed on record before the respective ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
