2016 (6) TMI 1103

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the period February 2008 to May 2008. The agreement was entered between appellant and Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) who had taken up the said project under sponsorship for M/s. Essar Oil Corporation, Mumbai (service recipient). During the course of audit, it was observed that appellants had not discharged their service tax liability on the amounts received as subcontract charges. A show-cause notice was issued raising such allegation. The appellant defended the notice contending that the main contractor NGRI has discharged the service tax liability on the amount received from the client and that therefore they are not liable to pay any service tax under the subcontract agreement. After due process of law, the original ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tted by appellant i.e. the information received under RTI Act, 2005 on the ground that it is not conclusive proof of payment of tax. On the application filed seeking information regarding the details of payment of service tax paid by NGRI in regard to the contract sponsored by M/s. Essar Oil Ltd. which is subject matter of dispute herein, NGRI has given the details of the payment of service tax. This document shows that out of the value of Rs. 480.15 lakh, the appellant was given subcontract of Rs. 2,38,81,490/-. For the total value of Rs. 480.15 lakhs, NGRI has paid service tax of Rs. 46,48,393/-. That a balance amount of Rs. 34.56 lakhs is yet to be received by NGRI. The learned AR strongly contended that the information given under RTI c....