2018 (6) TMI 1355

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sunil Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Mohd. Altaf, Asstt. Commissioner (DR), for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After hearing both the sides duly represented by Sh. Sunil Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the appellant and Sh. Mohd. Altaf, Ld. DR for the Revenue, we find that Service Tax to the tune of Rs. 24,56,897/- stands confirmed against the appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ince the service has been provided by the appellant and is taxable under the provisions of Section 65(68) and 65(105)(k) of the Act, the plea of the appellant that it is not payable by them as the same has been paid by the service receiver is not sustainable in view of the provisions of Section 68 of the Act under which responsibility of payment of Service Tax has been casted upon the service prov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Limited and have categorically concluded that they have provided only construction services to M/s. Grasim Industries Limited and the 'Manpower Supply Services' cannot be considered to be a sub-contract of the construction services. No Service Tax stands paid by the said M/s. Simplex Infrastructure Limited. As against the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals), Ld. Advocate for the appellant h....