Appeal allowed, service tax liability overturned for construction advances due to order cancellations.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the impugned order that imposed service tax liability on advances for construction work. The appellant's submission of certificates confirming order cancellations and return of advances, which were not presented during adjudication, led to the finding that as the advances were written off, no service tax was due. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision based on the additional documents, granting the appellant an opportunity for a new hearing. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside on 11/12/2017.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against service tax liability on advances received for construction work, condonation of delay in filing appeal.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original regarding the liability to pay service tax on advances received for construction work. The appellant, engaged in construction services, collected advances but did not carry out the construction due to order cancellations. The appellant argued that since the advances were returned to the parties, there should be no service tax liability. The appellant possessed certificates confirming the cancellation of orders and return of advances, which were not submitted during adjudication. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and perusing the certificates, concluded that as the advances were written off, there was no obligation to pay service tax. However, since the certificates were obtained after the impugned order, the appellant could not present them to the adjudicating authority.

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision based on the additional documents, particularly the certificates provided by the appellant. The appellant was granted an opportunity for an effective hearing during the de novo proceedings. Consequently, the impugned order was overturned, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand. The decision was pronounced in open court on 11/12/2017.

---