Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (6) TMI 17

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her associated structures. However, they were not discharging any service tax on these activities. Department issued a show-cause notice dated 21.04.2010, inter alia, proposing demand of Rs. 18,42,934/- with interest as service tax liability on the amount received towards Commercial or Industrial Construction Service prior to 01.06.2007 and under Works Contract Service thereafter. The show-cause notice also proposed a demand of Rs. 51,258/- toward service tax on the amounts received towards Cleaning Services during the period 20906-07 to 2008-09 with interest. The show-cause notice also proposed appropriation of amounts already paid-up by appellants for imposition of penalties under various provisions of law. In adjudication, the original a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... provided services to BSNL and others under the mistaken belief that they need not pay service tax on the service provided to construction agencies. But it was held inter alia that demand invoking extended period cannot sustain and penalties was also set aside. She prays that similar benefit may be accorded to the present appellant also. (iii) On the demand concerning cleaning services, the learned counsel concedes to tax liability. However, she prays for setting aside the penalty, since these services were provided to Govt. agencies and they were under bona fide belief that no tax was liable to be paid by them. 2. On the other hand, the Ld. AR Shri S. Govindarajan reiterates the impugned order. He further submits that appellants had not....