2023 (5) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot pay Service Tax. 2.1 Entertaining a doubt that the appellant having received an amount of Rs. 14,94,37,760/- for the construction service provided by them for the period from April 2009 to June 2010, a Show Cause Notice dated 13.10.2010 came to be issued proposing to demand Service Tax on the ground that the construction work undertaken by the appellant did not come within the exclusion definition of "residential complex" under Section 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994, apart from applicable interest and penalty. 2.2 The appellant appears to have filed a detailed reply defending its stand, but however, not satisfied with the same, the Adjudicating Authority, vide Order-in-Original No. 13/2013 dated 20.06.2013, has confirmed the demands ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....M/s. Krishna Homes v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2014 (34) S.T.R. 881 (Tri. - Del.)]; (ii) Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Visakhapatnam-I v. M/s. Pragati Edifice Pvt. Ltd. [2019 (31) G.S.T.L. 241 (Tri. - Hyd.)] (iii) M/s. South India Shelters Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai [Final Order Nos. 40123-40124/2023 dated 07.03.2023 - CESTAT, Chennai] 5. Per contra, the Learned Superintendent for the respondent relied upon the findings of the lower authority. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and have perused the impugned Order-in-Original. 7. We find that, at paragraph 19 of the impugned order, the Learned Commissioner has observed, after scrutinizing the agreements, that (i) the ....