2016 (12) TMI 1331

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al filed by the appellant. The appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) by the appellant was only for the limited relief of waiver of penalty imposed under Section 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The fact of the case is that the appellant were providing the services of 'Construction of Residential Complex Services' for various customers. The said service is taxable w.e.f. 01.07.2010, it was observed that although the appellant was registered themselves for the said services on 13.08.2011 but they have not discharged the Service Tax liability. The appellant have been providing the 'Construction of Residential Complex Service' since February, 2011 onwards. During the enquiry, on pointing by the Department that an amount of Service Tax....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....position of penalties made under Section 77 & 78. He submits that as regard the taxability on 'Construction of Residential Complex Services' there were confusion and doubts as evident that on the same issue the Apex Body of the builders i.e. Maharashtra Chamber of Housing and Industry has filed writ petition before Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. Therefore the legal position of taxability in respect of 'Construction of Residential Complex Services' was not clear, accordingly, most of the builders have not been discharging the Service Tax. He submits that since there was confusion that whether they are liable to pay their Service Tax, the appellant was not charging and collecting the Service Tax from the service recipient. He submits that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rvices provided by the appellant. Even though the matter was litigated in the court of law, this Act of the appellant or their association does not alter the unambiguous legal position of taxability on the services of 'Construction of Residential Complex Services'. It is fact that the appellant have not discharged the Service Tax in time and the same was paid only after intervention of the Department, therefore the lower authorities have correctly imposed and upheld the penalties under Section 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 which do not require any interference. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. 7. I find that it is a fact that though there was clear provision of Service Tax liability on the 'Con....