2018 (4) TMI 1322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (s) Shri S.S. Chattopadhayay, Suptd. (AR) for the Respondent (s)   Per C.J.Mathew, 1. The appellant, M/s Nitson & Amitsu Pvt Ltd, is a provider of 'construction services' and, prior to 1st June 2007, had been discharging tax liability on composite contract after availing the abatement of 67% under notification no.18/2005-ST dated 7th June 2005 and notification no.01/2006- ST dated 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Thereafter vide order-in-original no.101/COMMR/STII/ KOL/DENOVO/2016-17 dated 17th January 2017, Commissioner of Service Tax-II, Kolkata reduced the liability to Rs. 43,59,455/- by holding the appellant to be provider of 'completion and finishing service' ineligible for the benefit of notification no.01/2006-ST dated 1st March 2006 and on re-computing the taxable value after granting abatement u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... period was sought to be recovered merely on the ground of delay in intimation of option to exercise the discharge of duty liability under the composition scheme.   3. Learned Authorised Representatives submits that the remand order of the Tribunal was very clearly limited only to ascertainment of eligibility of benefit of abatement as provider of 'construction service'. It is also contend....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cision of the Tribunal in Mehta Plast Corporation v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [2016(44) STR 651 (Tri-Del)] supports this view. Accordingly, the differential duty for the period after 1st June, 2007, confirmed by the original authority, does not sustain. 5. Notwithstanding the submission of the Learned Authorised Representative that there was no ground or plea for exclusion from ta....