2019 (6) TMI 962

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e that the assessee was engaged in the construction activity of residential buildings of more than 12 units from 2012 onwards but had not registered and had not paid any service tax. The work of construction was sub-contracted and the assessee had collected amounts from the prospective buyers. After allowing abatement of 75% as per Notification No.29/2010-ST dt. 22/06/2010 and threshold exemption, the amount of Rs. 47,64,327/- was taxable income for the period 2011-12 to 2014-15. Further they had also provided service under renting of immovable property service during the period 01/07/2012 to 30/09/2014 and received consideration of Rs. 7,00,903/-. Department issued a notice on 20/01/2016 demanding Rs. 6,67,891/- along with interest and pen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s that there was no suppression of facts with intent to evade the tax. He further submitted that this issue is no more res integra and has been settled by various decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court. In support of this submission, he relied upon the following decisions:- i. CCE&ST, LTU, Bangalore Vs. Adecco Flexione Workforce [2012(26) STR 6 (Kar.)] ii. CCE, Nagpur Vs. Galaxy Construction P. Ltd. [2017(48) STR 37 (Bom.)] iii. Krishna HT Vs. CCE, Mysuru [2018-TIOL-1819-CESTAT-BANG] iv. TV Ismail Haji & Co. Vs. CCE&ST [2017(5) TMI 766-CESTAT, Bangalore] 4.2. He further submitted that penalty of Rs. 1,40,000/- under Rule 7c of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 read with Section 70 of the Act has wrongl....