TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (7) TMI 713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Rupees Ten thousand three hundred and ninety-one only) towards Education Cess demanded under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Act). (b) Rs. 91,75,173/- (Rupees ninety-one lakh seventy-five thousand one hundred and seventy-three only) towards service tax and an amount of Rs. 1,83,503/- (Rupees one lakh eighty-three thousand five hundred and three only) towards Education Cess demanded under Section 73(1) of the Act. (c) Interest under Section 75 of the Act on the tax demanded. (d) Penalty of Rs. 98,88,593/- (Rupees Ninety-eight lakh eighty-eight thousand five hundred and ninety-three only) under Section 78 of the Act. 2. The service tax of Rs. 91,75,173/- is demanded towards liability under the category of construction servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....demand is challenged on the basis that the activity was aimed at promoting welfare of tribals in the area and that the construction could not be construed as for commercial purpose and eligible under construction services. Moreover, the appellants constructed the houses under a composite contract entered into with their client for provision of materials and services. They paid sales tax on materials involved in the transaction. The contract could not be vivisected and the service alone subjected to tax. The impugned activity was appropriately classifiable under 'works contract' service introduced in the statute from 1-6-07 and the same could not be taxed under a pre-existing category for an earlier period. They rely on various case law, mai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 26 (Tri.-Del.)]. 5. We have also heard the learned SDR who submits that the appellants had not substantiated its claim that the impugned activities were carried out under works contracts. No documents had been furnished to the adjudicating authority in proof of payment of sales tax to the State Government while executing works contract. She submits that the matter has to be remanded for the Commissioner to take a fresh decision after considering the various documentary evidence sought to be submitted for consideration by the Tribunal. 6. On a careful consideration of the case records and rival submissions, we find that the impugned activity had been carried out under works contracts. As 'works contract' was brought under tax net for the....