TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (4) TMI 566
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thikeyan, Technical Member - As per the impugned order, the appellants M/s. Totem Infrastructure Ltd. are required to deposit an amount of Rs. 54,58,153 (Rupees fifty four lakh fifty eight thousand one hundred and fifty three only) towards Service Tax found due from them for services rendered during 19-7-2005 to 31-7-2006 along with applicable interest, and penalties imposed under sections 76, 77 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccepted the plea of the appellant therein that the work involved was 'works contract' which was brought into the tax net beyond the period of dispute. It is submitted that the appellant herein had also undertaken the impugned activity as a 'works contract'. Our attention was invited to the contract between M/s. Soma Enterprises Ltd. and the appellant, wherein the work carried out i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctor, they were not liable to pay any service tax. The appellants relied on the following circulars : (i) F.No. 341/43/96-TRU, dated 31-10-1996 (ii) F.No. B43/5/97-TRU, dated 2-7-1997 (iii) F.No. B11/98-TRU, dated 7-10-1998 (iv) F.No. 96/7/2007-ST, dated 23-8-2007 2. Learned Counsel also relied on the following case laws, wherein it was decided that a sub-contractor was not liable ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants have made out a strong prima facie case. From the certificate produced by the learned Counsel, we find that the appellants are registered with the commercial tax authorities of Chhattisgarh Government as an assessee for 'works contract' from 15-4-2005. Activities classified under 'works contract' were brought under tax net only from 1-6-2007. Even if the impugned activiti....