TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 1500
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the assessee was engaged in providing Commercial Construction Services and was duly registered with the Department for the same. They were also paying service tax on the said services after availing the abatement of 67% and were regularly filing the service tax return in the form of ST-3 return. However, subsequently revenue entertained a view that the services being provided by the appellant-assessee also involved supply of soil, excavation of soil, installation and operation of bores for dewatering, hiring of dewatering pumps with complete installation, commissioning and maintenance at different projects, providing dewatering etc. for various construction companies and as such the services provided by them were correctly classifiabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ose of the appeal on limitation only. 3. There is no dispute that the appellant applied for registration under the category of Commercial and Industrial Construction Services, which was granted to them. Thereafter, they were discharging their service tax liability under the said category and were filing due requisite returns. Our attention also stand drawn to a letter dated 16.06.2007 of appellant's Jurisdictional Superintendent which for better appreciation is reproduced below:- To, M/s Sidharth Construction Company, Grater Noida Respected Sir, Subject:- Discrepancies regarding Service Tax returns-reg. You have applied for Service Tax registration in the category of "Construction Services" directly in the Division Office on 13.11.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issued a show cause notice dated 10.04.2012 invoking the longer period on ground that the services being provided by the assessee were not Commercial or Industrial Construction Services and duly fell under the category of Site Formation, thus leading to confirmation of demand, as no abatement was available under the Site Formation Service. 4. Referring to the above communication between the appellant and the revenue as also by taking into consideration that there is no dispute that the appellants were duly registered and were filing ST-3 return, we find no suppression or misstatement on the part of the appellant with an intention to evade payment of duty, can be alleged so as to justifiably invoke the longer period of limitation. It seems ....