TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1321
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts of the case are that appellant was registered as service provider under the category of works contract services but they were not paying service tax nor filing periodical returns. On the basis of information received from Income Tax Department that the appellant has received amount of Rs. 1,81,24,616/- during the financial year 2012-13 and on the said amount TDS was deducted under section 194C/194J of Income Tax Act 1961. The appellant was asked to submit their financial documents along with the copies of ST-3 returns, challans during financial year 2012-13 but the appellant did not respond, whereas the appellant intimated that they have stopped the work from 31.3.2012 and earlier the firm was operated by his father, Late Shri Ramesh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of the Revenue is that prior to 1.7.2012 the services in relation to erection, installation, commissioning, management, repairs and maintenance are provided by the appellant and for the period post 1.7.2012 the appellant was required to pay service tax under negative list based on taxation regime. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant to demand service tax for the services provided by them as appellant has failed to provide any documentary evidence in support of the material sold by them in providing taxable services under category of any erection, commissioning and installation services. The show cause notice was adjudicated and demand of service tax was confirmed against the appellant. Against the said order appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed back to the adjudicating authority to ascertain the taxable amount for the services provided by appellant exclusively in nature of erection, commissioning and installation or management, maintenance or repair services. 7. On the other hand, learned AR submitted that the appellant did not provide any details during the course of investigation moreover, the appellant has failed to provide the document which shows that VAT has been paid on supply of goods, therefore, impugned demands are rightly confirmed. 8. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 9. On hearing the parties, we find that the main contention of the appellant is that in most of the cases they have provided services along with material. From the work orders enumerate....