2025 (6) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and acquaintances, who got the houses built for their own use as residence. During the relevant period, the appellant also carried out construction activity for Samudhayik Bhavan for Rajput Niswarth Seva Sangh. On the basis of information gathered from Income Tax Department, it was noticed that an amount of Rs.1,32,60,229 was shown as receipts towards provision of services during the period 2013-2014. On that basis, it appeared that the appellant was providing taxable services, but they have short paid the due service tax leviable thereon. Show cause notice dated 12.10.2018 was issued to the appellant proposing demand of service tax of Rs.16,38,964 along with interest and penalty under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. On adjudicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ke the show cause notice being vague, benefit of cum-duty tax, valuation, and penalty etc. The learned Counsel has also challenged the invocation of the extended period of limitation on the ground that he bonafide believed that the activities carried out by him are not exigible to service tax. 6. The learned Departmental Representative contested the appeal by reiterating the findings of the Authorities below. Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs. Dilip Kumar and Company - 2018(361) ELT 577 (SC), he submitted that it is for the appellant to establish that he is eligible for the exemption which applies in respect of construction of single residential unit and is not part of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Balaji Industrial Products Ltd. Vs. Commr. Of Cus. & C. Ex., Jaipur- 2019 [370] E.L.T.280[Tri.-Del.] c. Antares Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Chandigarh - 2024[388] E.L.T.200[Tri.-chan.] d. Balajee Machinery Vs. Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Patna-II e. Maa Kalika Transport Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of CGST & C.Ex., Rourkela. -2023[79] G.S.T.L. 263[Tri. Kolkata] f. Om Sai Professional Det. & Security Ser. P. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Guntur-2008(10) S.T.R.59[Tri.-Bang.] 8. In Central Sales Tax, New Delhi versus Kamal Lalwani (supra), it has been categorically observed that all the activities undertaken by the appellant were a part of the reflection made in the balance sheet and income tax returns in which case no sup....