2025 (5) TMI 1910

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l against the order confirming the demand of Rs. 2,11,59,238/- along with interest and imposed penalties. The Department has filed an appeal against the impugned order for allowing the benefit of cenvat credit to the appellant. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a proprietor concern engaged in providing "Supply of Tangible Goods Service" and "Construction of roads on job work basis". The Appellant had obtained ST Registration STC No. ARVPS0281PST001 dated 23.06.2008. The assessee was providing these services in the State of Jammu and Kashmir which was not taxable as the same was being provided beyond the taxable territory. The assessee supplied equipment such as excavators, transit mixers, tippers, soil compactors, tan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that for the purposes of computing service tax liability, the value of taxable service has been derived on the basis of figures reflected in the Balance Sheet, which includes income from all sources, and not merely from taxable services. Learned counsel also submitted that it is well settled that service tax cannot be demanded merely on the basis of income reflected in the Balance Sheet, unless revenue establishes that such income is related to the taxable services. Learned counsel contended that the show cause notice as well as in the impugned order, no attempt had been to bifurcate the revenue from taxable services and from other sources. In this regard, learned counsel relied upon the follo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the period 01.04.2008 31.03.2009, and other relevant documents. He further submitted that the Adjudicating Authority had erred in holding that the assessee had suppressed the facts. Learned counsel contended that this was alleged as there was delay of filing various details due to the the proprietor's ill health. Hence, the invocation of extended period under section 73(1) was completely un-warranted. In this regard, learned counsel relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CCE vs. Reliance Industries - 2023 SCC Online 767. 3.1 Learned counsel further submitted that the show cause notice admitted that the service had been provided on job work basis in relation to construction of roads and tunnels etc., which was exempted fr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vate Limited vs. CCE- (2007) STR 312 (TRI.-BOM.). 4. Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue reiterated the findings in the impugned order for confirming the demand and prayed to allow the appeal filed by the Department. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Authorized Representative for the Department and perused the records. 6. Learned counsel stated that the assessee had always complied with the statutory provisions and filed ST-3 returns diligently as was evident from table below. ST-3 Retruns for the period Due Date of filing Actual filing date 2009-10 April-September 25.10.2009 20.10.2009 2009-2010 October-March 25.04.2010 22.04.2010 2010-2011 April-September 25.10.201....