TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 868
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....V Nair, AC (AR) ORDER Per: Shri Anil Choudhary: The appellant, M/s Shree Parvati Construction, is a partnership firm, engaged in commercial and industrial construction, works contract service and also received input services under Goods Transport Agency Services. This appeal is preferred against Order-in-Appeal No. PUNE-ST-002-APP-46-13-14 dated 24.6.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd., M/s Maharashtra Machines, M/s Maharashtra Engineers and M/s Maharashtra Enterprises, etc. Further, demand of Rs. 13,46,239/- was proposed under the Works Contract Service in respect of which the appellant had already deposited the Service Tax amount of Rs. 8,97,867/-. Further Rs. 1728/- was demanded towards Goods Transport Agency - input services. The appellant contested the show-cause noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... gross contract received. Accordingly, he dropped the demand of Rs. 4,50,100/- out of total demand of Rs. 13,46,239/-. Therefore, what remained was admitted demand of Rs. 8,97,867/-. The appellate authority further reduced the late fee imposed under Section 70 from Rs. 24,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- and reduced the penalty under Section 77(1)(a) from Rs. 2,14,000/- to Rs. 1,07,000/- and further reduced ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Service Tax + interest and does not dispute its liability, no further show-cause notice is required to be issued. Accordingly prays for allowing the appeal. 4. Learned AR relies on the impugned order. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that it is a facts on record that other than admitted liability, amount proposed to be demanded and confirmed from the appellant have been droppe....