TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal grants partial waiver, directs deposit within set timeframe, with pre-deposit condition waived for remaining balance.</h1> <h3>ITD CEMENTATION INDIA LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, MUMBAI</h3> ITD CEMENTATION INDIA LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, MUMBAI - [2008] 16 STT 196 (MUM - CESTAT), 2008 (12) S.T.R. 578 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues:1. Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty.2. Allegations of providing services without registration and payment of service tax.3. Confirmation of demand, penalty, and interest by adjudicating authority.4. Interpretation of services provided under the exclusion clause.5. Decision on the waiver of pre-deposit amount.Issue 1: Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penaltyThe applicant filed a stay petition seeking a waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty imposed for not discharging the service tax liability. The applicant had constructed 'Diaphragm wall and anchor slab' on the banks of the river Sabarmati under a contract from Sabarmati River Front Development Corporation Ltd. The authorities issued a show-cause notice demanding service tax, interest, and penalties, which the applicant contested, leading to the present stay petition.Issue 2: Allegations of providing services without registration and payment of service taxThe allegations against the applicant were that they provided services without registering with the appropriate revenue authority and without paying service tax. The show-cause notice demanded recovery of a substantial amount of service tax, interest, and penalties, citing the extended period of five years for recovery under the Finance Act, 1994.Issue 3: Confirmation of demand, penalty, and interest by adjudicating authorityAfter considering the submissions made by the applicant, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand for service tax, imposed penalties, and directed payment of interest on the confirmed demand. This confirmation led to the filing of the stay petition by the applicant seeking a waiver of pre-deposit of the amount involved in the case.Issue 4: Interpretation of services provided under the exclusion clauseThe applicant argued that the services provided, namely the construction of diaphragm wall and anchor slab, should fall under an exclusion clause in the definition of services. The exclusion clause exempts services related to agriculture, irrigation, watershed development, and renovating or restoring water sources or bodies. The interpretation of whether the applicant's activities fall under this exclusion clause required further examination.Issue 5: Decision on the waiver of pre-deposit amountAfter considering the submissions from both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not establish a prima facie case for a complete waiver of the confirmed service tax amount. The Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit a specified amount within a given timeframe and waived the pre-deposit condition for the balance amount pending the appeal's disposal.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision regarding the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalties.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
