https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775821 The CESTAT held that the appellant's work constituted "Original Works" under Explanation-I to Rule 2A of the Valuation Rules, as the finishing activities were integral to making the new construction habitable. Consequently, the appellant was entitled to 60% abatement and liable to pay service tax on 40% of the contract value. The impugned order denying abatement was set aside. The main demand was quashed, leading to the waiver of interest and penalty related to that demand. However, interest on the short payment amounting to Rs. 12,05,704 was upheld, as it was paid over two years after the due date but before the show cause notice. The appeal was allowed in part. en-us Wed, 30 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Jul 2025 14:24:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775821 The CESTAT held that the appellant's work constituted "Original Works" under Explanation-I to Rule 2A of the Valuation Rules, as the finishing activities were integral to making the new construction habitable. Consequently, the appellant was entitled to 60% abatement and liable to pay service tax on 40% of the contract value. The impugned order denying abatement was set aside. The main demand was quashed, leading to the waiver of interest and penalty related to that demand. However, interest on the short payment amounting to Rs. 12,05,704 was upheld, as it was paid over two years after the due date but before the show cause notice. The appeal was allowed in part. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 30 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775821