Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2014 (6) TMI 692

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....adhwa Out of total confirmed service tax demand of Rs.5,15,62,830/-, and equal amount of penalty, the appellant has already deposited an amount of Rs.4.03 crores approximately and interest of Rs. 66 lakhs approximately. By treating the same as sufficient for the purpose of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, we dispense with the condition of pre-deposit and proceed to decide the appeal itself.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s reflected in the works contract including the mobilisation advance. 3. As is seen from the above there seems to be contradictory stand taken by the appellant himself, which needs to be verified. Ld. Advocate is not disputing the legal proposition that the advance received by him is required to be included in the value of the works contract, which is required to be discharged to service tax @ 4%....