TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 456
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of construction service to various infrastructure projects. SCN dt.09.09.2020 was issued invoking the extended period of limitation, demanding service tax for the period April, 2015 to June, 2017, alleging that the appellants did not pay service tax properly and further, not made proper disclosures to the department. It was only during verification carried out by the department, the shortage in payment of service tax was found. The SCN was adjudicated on contest, upholding the invokation of extended period of limitation and the following demands were confirmed with interest & imposing equal penalty under Sec 78 on two projects executed by the appellant during the period April 2015 to June 2017. The details of which are as follows: 1. S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come received from Subansiri Project under extended period under proviso to Sec 73(1). c) The above SCN was adjudicated vide OIO dt.27.01.2017 by holding that the activity is taxable from 01.07.2012 and upheld the demand on RA Bill No. 75 under extended period. d) Subsequently, another round of audit was conducted by the officers of Hyderabad Audit Commissionerate for the period 2013-14 to 2015-16 and Final Audit Report No. 54/2016-17 dt.22.06.2017 was issued, wherein no para was raised on Subansiri Project. 5. From the above facts, it is clear that the department was fully aware of the activity of the appellant and the SCN dt.09.09.2020 for the period 2015-16 to June, 2017 is clearly barred by limitation as second SCN on the same i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant paid Rs.1,90,32,604/- before the statement dt.20.12.2017 and balance tax amount with interest was paid by March, 2018, which is much before the issue of SCN. No penalty is to be attracted as per Sec 73(3). There is no case of suppression, but only delayed payment of tax, for reasons beyond control. Reliance is placed on CCE & ST, LTU, Bangalore vs Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd [2012 (26) STR 3 (Kar.)], wherein it was held that when the tax and interest were paid before SCN, no notice need to be issued as per Sec 73(3). RCM demand on Royalty paid to State Government for sand/stone/earth: 8. The permits were issued in the name of M/s BGS-SGS-SOMA JV and the appellant did not receive any services from Government. They only ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i Dam/Tunnel for the period 2012-13 and issue of earlier SCN dt.31.03.2016 on the same issue, the present SCN for the demand of Rs.18,07,95,801/- is clearly time barred as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nizam Sugar Factory vs CCE AP (supra). Learned Counsel has also demonstrated from the RA Bills which are prepared by the main contractor - M/s BGS-SGS-SOMA JV, wherein they have deducted the amount towards service tax from their gross amount. Thus, it is also obvious that appellant was under the impression that they had already suffered the service tax by way of deduction at source, by the main contractor on the said activity. Thus, there does not appear to be any deliberate attempt or intention on the part of the appellant to evade servic....