TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 864
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m-commercial complex and residential complex on the land owned by Govt. of Meghalaya. The appellants registered themselves with the Service Tax Department and paid service tax by availing Notification No.01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006 by paying service tax at the rate of 33% of the gross taxable value during the period 2009-10 to June, 2012. But the appellant took the cenvat credit on some of the input service, which has been used by the appellant for providing output taxable service. 2.1 Subsequent to July, 2012, the appellant was paying service tax at the rate of 25% of the gross taxable value in terms of Sl.No.12 of Notification No.26/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 and an audit was conducted at the premises of the appellant and it was found th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id the differential amount of service tax along with interest. 2.6 In response to the audit objection, the appellant has reversed the excess cenvat credit of Rs.27,429/- along with interest and intimated to the Department and further, the appellant has not segregated the amount of tax paid on Renting of Immovable Property Service and the construction service. If the same is segregated, the appellant is required to pay full amount of service tax on renting of immovable property, but the show-cause notice dated 24.10.2014 was issued to the appellant demanding service tax of Rs.4,28,39,702/- and recovery of excess cenvat credit availed by the appellant amounting to Rs.27,429/- along with interest and to impose penalties on the appellant. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and the differential service tax has been paid by the appellant along with interest and intimated to the Department on 30.03.2013, 05.04.2013, 20.03.2014 & 22.03.2014. In that circumstances, no demand is sustainable against the appellant under construction service. 3.2 With regard to excess availment of cenvat credit, the appellant submitted that they paid the said amount of Rs.27,429/- along with interest of Rs.13,523/- vide challan dated 20.03.2014 and intimated to the Department. Therefore, the demand of cenvat credit already reversed, is not sustainable. 3.3 With regard to renting of immovable property service, it is his submission that in respect of whole of the demand taken together by giving benefit of the notification as clai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2012, it is alleged that the benefit of Notification No.26/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, is not available to the appellant on the ground that the subject land on which the construction was undertaken belongs to Govt. of Meghalaya and the property is not intended for sale to the prospective customers. Alternatively, in terms of Rule 2A(ii) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, which was amended by Notification No.24/2012-ST dated 06.06.2012, the appellant is entitled to avail the benefit of abatement of 60% of the total value received by them as they were involved in the service of construction along with materials. In that circumstances, the appellant is required to pay service tax @ 40% of the value received and the differe....