AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 431
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Crystal Metals Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in the business of providing taxable services falling under the category of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service'. During the scrutiny of the ST-3 return filed by the appellant, short payment of service tax of Rs.87,740/- was noticed and further detailed information in that context as well as about the business of the Appellant was called for by the Service tax Range office and in response to the same the appellant submitted that they are executing works contract i.e they are supplying & fixing the materials; that their services are at the stage of post construction of any residential or commercial building/complex; that they are actually doing complet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....des completion and finishing services as described under sub-clause (c) of clause (25b) of Section 65 of the Act. It appears that the service provided by the said service provider clearly falls under sub-clause (c) ibid and therefore they were required to pay service tax on the gross amount received for providing the said taxable service. It also further appeared that the benefit of paying service tax @2% as works contract service is also not available to the Appellant in view of the clarification under circular No. 98/1/2008-ST issued F.No. 345/6/2007-TRU dtd. 04.01.2008 wherein it has been specifically stated that in respect of revision of classification to works contract service from the respective classification and payment of service t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce Act, 1994. 4. The Learned Advocate Shri Rahul Gajera appearing for the assessee-appellant submits that the lower authorities have nowhere held that the activity undertaken by the appellant was not execution of 'works contract., they have refrained from giving any finding on this aspect. But the only stand taken by the department post 01.06.2007 was that the appellant did not formally file any letter exercising the option to pay tax under composite scheme. This is an implicit admission that the services were execution of 'works contract'. The question of exercising the option can arise only once it is admitted that the service in question was 'works contract. There is no allegation or finding that the nature of the Appellant's activity ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... where the glazing in not supported by an inner wall, the glazing cannot be said to be completion or finishing but it has to be considered as part of the construction of the building. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate the activity of appellant. The building will not come into existence if the outer wall is not constructed. Therefore, where the outer wall comprises of the glazing alone, the glazing work is not a completion or finishing work. The lower authorities have erred in ignoring the submission of appellant and further in holding that the activity was completion & finishing service. 7. He also argued that no formal option was required for availing the composition scheme under the "works contracts". Payment of 2% of s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was issued on 02.03.2010 for the period 16.06.2005 to 30.09.2007 is hit by limitation. The department was always aware that the appellant was paying tax under composition scheme. This was evident from perusal of the return filed by the appellant. Therefore, the allegation of suppression of facts and intention to evade are both incorrect. The Range Superintendent by his letter dtd. 17.01.2008 pointed out some discrepancies in the ST-3 returns filed by the appellant for the half year ending, September 2007. In the said letter he had sought the details of abatement @67% availed by the appellant. Appellant vide letter dtd. 15.02.2008 replied to the said letter dtd. 17.01.2008 and further requested to change the category of service from "const....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cers. It is on record that the said Service tax returns were scrutinized by the Jurisdictional officer on 17.01.2008 and he pointed out that there is short payment of service tax of Rs. 87,740/-. We have seen the correspondences entered into between the appellant and the Revenue. Superintendent's letter dated 17-01-2008 addressed to the appellant is as under: "Subject : - Discrepancies noticed in the ST-3 returns: Please refer to the ST-3 return for the half year ending April 2007 to September 2007 filed by you , to this office. On scrutiny if the said return filed for the service category of Commercial Construction Service, it is found that you have short paid the Service tax of Rs. 87,740/-. The detail calculation if the said short ....