2018 (6) TMI 338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....niyam, AC (AR) for the respondent. ORDER Per: V. Padmanabhan The present appeal challenges the Order-in-Appeal No.8/2010 dated 24.02.2010. The demand covered the period 2004-05 to 2006-07. The appellant was engaged in providing "Construction Service and Commercial or Industrial Construction service". During the period under dispute, the appellant failed to take out registration nor made a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with effect from 01.05.2006, the definition covered "any person". The appellant did not pay service tax on the basis of a bonafide belief that the individual was not liable for payment of service tax and hence she prayed that the Revenue was not justified in raising the demand by invoking the extended period of time limit under Section 73. Finally, she submitted that the entire service tax demand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....03-ST dated 21.08.2003. Consequently, the levy of service tax cannot be sustained for the period up to 30.04.2006, and is set aside. 5.2 With effect from 01.05.2006, the definition stands amended and has been made applicable to "any person". Consequently, the appellant will be liable for making payment of service tax w.e.f. 01.05.2006. Since the appellant has failed to take out registration or ....