2021 (12) TMI 1268

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ards the provisions of said services from their service receiver but have not paid the Service Tax on such taxable receipts amounting to Rs. 6,322,147/- during the period of 2013-14. Accordingly vide Show Cause Notice No. 4611 dated 12.10.2018 aforesaid amount of Service Tax was proposed to be recovered from the appellant along with the interest and proportionate penalties. The said proposal was rejected by the Original Adjudication Authority vide the order No. 97/2019-20 dated 11.3.2020 holding that the law does not discriminate between the contractor and sub contractor in so far as the Service Tax liability is concerned. The appeal against this order as filed by the Department has been allowed vide Order-in-Appeal No. 76/20-21 dated 18.2.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant for avoiding payment of Service Tax. There was confusion in the industry about the liability of sub contractor during the period in dispute. Said contravention / confusion has been settled by the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. Melange Developer Pvt. Ltd. reported as [2020 33 GSTL 116 (Tri-LB)] making sub contractor individually liable for the payment. In the present case that there is non payment by the appellant as sub contractor but the impugned Service Tax liability stand already discharged and the amount received already stand deposited with the Government by the main contractor. It is therefore submitted that the demand is alleged to have been wrongly invoked by extending period of limitation. Or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T, Malda Division, WB [OIA No. 325/SLG-ST/2018-19 dated 5.3.2019]; 2. DNS Contractor vs. CCE Delhi 2015 (51) GSTL 636]; 3. Murari Lal Singhal vs CCE & ST, Jaipur [2019 (25) GSTL 45 (Tri-Del)]; 4. Thadi Satya Ramalinga Reddy vs. CCE Visakapatnam II [2017 (4) GSTL 421] 6. I also observe that it was the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. Melange Developer Pvt. Ltd. reported as [2020 33 GSTL 116 (Tri-LB)] that the aforesaid decisions have been altered to the fact that the sub contractor being an individual service provider that to the main contractor but is liable to discharge the Service Tax liability to the extent of amount of service being provided by him to the main contractor. All the above decisions an....