2015 (12) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Balamurugan, AC (AR) ORDER Per R Periasami Appellant filed appeal against the order passed by Commissioner of Central Excise dt. 30.6.2014 wherein the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand of service tax of Rs. 1,64,06,953/- with interest and also imposed equivalent penalty under Section 78. He also imposed penalty under Section 77 and ordered payment under Section 70 of the Fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d an amount of Rs. 11,86,975/- as per ST-3 returns which has not been considered and included by the adjudicating authority. Adjudicating authority has not taken into account the excludible value of non-taxable service. He also submits that they have provided service to the main contractor and the service tax liability to be charged by the main contractor and they are not required to pay tax. Ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat appellants have not made out a prima facie case for waiver of predeposit of entire demand. Appellant's contention of they being a sub-contractor, tax liability should be fastened on the main contractor will be examined at the time of final hearing of appeal. Accordingly, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the appellant to predeposit Rs. 16,00,000/-....