TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 334
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the period 2008-09 to 2010-11, copy of Balance sheet for the period 2007-08 to 2011-12, copy of contract, copy of ITR for 2007-08 to 2011-12. On perusal of those documents, it was observed that the appellant had filed the ST-3 returns under "Construction of Residential Complex Service" despite being registered for providing "Construction service other than residential complex, including commercial/industrial buildings or civil structures". 2.1 Further investigation revealed that during the period 2007-08 to 2011-12 & 2012-13 appellant had entered into contracts with : (i) M/s Parsvnath developers for being awarded work for Storm Water Drain Work for Project Parsvnath City, Daruhera and also in Panipat and Rohtak ; (ii) M/s AIPL Ambuja for being awarded work for construction of seven villas 250 sq. yard each at Dreamcity, Amritsar ; (iii) M/s CHD Developers Pvt. Ltd. for whom appellant executed work of construction of sewer line, storm water drainage and water supply for CHD City at Sector 45, Karnal, Haryana . 2.2 Department formed the opinion that these works are the part of the projects being constructed by main contractor hence are chargeable to service tax. Appellant h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... registration for any other activity including the one in question was not taken. However, during the period from 2008-09 to 2010-11 they had been regularly submitting their ST-3 returns. 4.1 It is submitted that perusal and examination of the impugned SCNs reveals that no basis what so ever has been discussed to support the contention/allegation that services were appropriately classifiable under "Commercial or Industrial Construction service" (CICS) is defined under Section 65 (105) (zzq), Construction of Complex service (CCS) is defined under Section 65 (105) (zzzh) and Work Contract Service (WCS) is defined under Section 65 (105) (zzza). The SCNs do not specify/segregate quantum of service tax liability under each of service tax categories i.e. CICS, CCS and WCS. In respect of contract dated 17.06.2009 for construction seven villas at Dream City, Amritsar, it is submitted that services do not come within the ambit of definition of CCS (Residential Complex), the number of units being less than 12. 4.2 In the impugned order though reference is made regarding contract of M/s Ambuja Housing & Urban Infrastructure Ltd. specifically indicating that it was a composite contract and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce of specific value of goods involved, the calculation has been rightly done by the department taking the whole amount into consideration and considering the services as pure services. 5.1 Learned Authorized Representative also submitted that the Appellant had never disclosed the facts to the Department which came to the notice of the Department only at the time of investigation. The Appellant is working under self-assessment system. They are bound by service tax law to correctly assess their service tax liability and thereafter to file their ST-3 returns properly. Since the appellant neither assessed the correct amount of service tax nor has shown the actual amount in the relevant ST- 3 returns, thus violated the provisions of section 70 of the Act. It is rightly held that the appellant has willfully suppressed the facts from the department with intention to evade the payment of service tax. Therefore, extended period and penalty under Section 78 is invokable. 6. Having heard both the parties and after perusing the record we observe and hold as follows: The appellant has alleged the show cause notice to be a vague document. We observe that SCN does not specify the amount/segr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... similar issue. The CESTAT, New Delhi has ruled that the value of free of cost diesel provided by the recipient should not be included in the value of service rendered (transport of mining service). The department had appealed against the decision before the Supreme Court and the appeal was dismissed. Hence it is held that the value of free material supplied by M/s Parsvnath Developers is wrongly included and tax has wrongly been demanded on the said value. 9. With respect to the appellant's client namely CHD and Ambuja, the benefit of abatement has been denied. We do not find any reason for such denial in the order under challenge. The activity carried out by the appellant for all of its client is composite in nature. Admittedly the transaction involves transfer of goods along with supply of labour. The composite contract are known as works contract services w.e.f. 01.06.2007 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Larsen Toubro Ltd. reported as 2015 (39) STR 913 has held that the liability of service tax in case of work contract services does not arise prior 01.06.2007. Post 01.06.2007 the works contract services cannot be classified as any service simpliciter. It was held as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....supra) that the entry under Section 65(105)(zzd) is liable to be invoked only for construction simpliciter. Therefore. there is no scope for vivisection to isolate the service component of the contract." 14. This Tribunal also in the case of M/s. Jambeshwar Construction Co Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax-Jaipur-II- 2019 (3) TMI 39 CESTAT New Delhi, the Hon'ble CESTAT has held as under : "8. The perusal of the Show Cause Notice indicates that the demand for the service tax has been raised under the category of Construction of Residential Complex Services. In view of the Apex Court decision in the case of Larsen and Tubro (supra) the liability for service tax, if at all, can be raised only under the category of WCS. Perusal of the decisions relied upon by the learned Consultant for the appellant leads us to the position that the demand raised under the Construction of Complex Services cannot be upheld in view of the Apex Court decision." "6 As regards the period after 1.6.2007, since the demand was raised under 'commercial or industrial construction service, whereas admittedly the service is correctly classifiable under work contract service, demand ra....