TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent Scheme, 2013 (VCES), declaring the tax dues as Rs. 5,27,916/- for the period 2010-11 to December. On scrutiny of the said declarations and that of P&L account of Income tax return and Form AS 26 for the assessment year 2008-09 to 2013-14, department formed an opinion that the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax amounting to Rs. 21,98,813/- for the period 2008-09 to 2012-13. It was observed that the amount of Rs. 5,27,916/- as was declared in the VCES was on account of availing 67% abatement on gross receipts, but the said abatement was not available to the Appellants. Accordingly, vide Show Cause Notice No. 89, dated 12-12-2014, department proposed the recovery of Service Tax amounting Rs. 21,98,813 along with the interest at the appropriate rate and the proportionate penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1998. Finally, holding that the Appellant has failed to make a true declaration, the same was also proposed to be rejected. 3. While adjudicating the said show cause notice, though the VCES declaration of the Appellant as was filed on 16-12-2013 was not rejected. However, the demand of Rs. 2,23,644/- out of the proposed demand was confirmed along wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The adjudicating authority is alleged to have ignored the relevant documents and that the value of such services was liable to be taxed @ 60% only, in view of Notification No. 12/2012, dated 20-6-2012. Finally, impressing upon that in fact the tax liability of the Appellant comes to Rs. 5,10,190/-. Still an amount of Rs. 5,56,494.00 (5,27,916.00 + 28,578.00) stands already deposited. Since the amount deposited is already more than the liability of the appellant, confirmation even of Rs. 2,23,644/- by the adjudicating authority is not sustainable. No question of imposing penalty at all arises. Order under challenge is, accordingly, prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 7. While rebutting these arguments, it is submitted on behalf of the department that the adjudicating authority below has done a meticulous year-wise calculation about the liability of the Appellant w.e.f. the year 2008-2009 till the year 2012-2013. The nature and extent of service rendered has duly been summarised along with the amount receipt for rendering those services. It is after the said meticulous exercise that the proposal of recovery of Rs. 21,98,813/- has been considered only t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n denied for want of any evidence for the value of services being provided during the preceding year that of 2007/2008. 10. From the arguments of the Appellant and also from the record and also from the order under challenge, it is apparent that all the services have duly been explained with the respective amount received qua the same. Hence, it cannot be presumed that sufficient evidence would not have been provided by the Appellant. Adjudicating authority has talked about going through the contract which again corroborates absence of relevant evidence as has been taken a ground for confirming the demand irrespective to a lesser extent than it was proposed. We further observed that vide Para 19.3 of Order-in-Original (O-I-O), Commissioner has denied the abatement of the value of services received for maintenance and up-keeping of lawns & parks in Thermal Colony. The reason for such denial given by the Commissioner is that the services are classifiable under management, provision of abatement on account of providing these services including pesticides, insecticides, manure and plants. Further, they have not charged the separate value of these items in the contract. Furtherm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....clauses (A) and (B), including maintenance, repair, completion and finishing services such as glazing, plastering, floor and wall tilling, installation of electrical fittings of an immovable property, service tax shall be payable on sixty per cent, of the total amount charged for the works contract;" In the light of above, the value of services provided in relation to the services of painting & white washing are to be taxed @ 60%. Period Amount and tax liability worked out by the department Amount and tax liability declared by the declarant Gross receipt Taxable amount Tax liability Gross receipt Taxable amount Tax liability 2008-09 3901532 3901532 482230 0 0 0 2009-10 1104712 1104712 113785 0 0 0 The present investigation got initiated based on Income Tax data about taxable amount for respective year as received on account of services relating to road, tube well/bore well/submersible pump and private house, which are exempt. It proves beyond doubt that the taxable value in FYs 2008-09 & 2009-10 was Zero. Thus, for considering the admissibility of exemption for the FY 2010-11 the taxable turnover of FY....