2019 (5) TMI 76

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....AL) Shri Ch. Nageswara Rao, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri Arun Kumar, Authorized Representative for the Respondent. ORDER Per: P.V. Subba Rao. 1. This appeal is filed against Order-in-Original No. 17/2012-ST (Commr) dated 30.10.2012. 2. The period of dispute involved in this case is 01.10.2005 to 30.09.2010. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. 4. The appellant herein is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bmits that it is not in dispute that they have constructed residential complexes and this service was introduced in the charging section vide Sec.65(91a) w.e.f. 01.07.2010. CBEC in its circular No. 151/2/2012-ST dated 10.02.2012 in Para 2.1(A)(i) has clarified that for the period prior to 01.07.2010 such service will not be taxable in terms of Board's Circular No. 108/2/2009-ST dated 29.01.2009. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mits that they have been paying service tax and submits a copy of ST-3 return to substantiate his claim. 8. Learned departmental representative reiterates the findings of the lower authority. He does not dispute the facts of the case submitted by the learned counsel. 9. We have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records and find that the issue of taxability on construction ....