2026 (5) TMI 11

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red to the Revenue that the Appellants have received gross payments of Rs.10,27,93,514/- and Rs.9,14,03,650/- during the Financial Year 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectfully and they had issued bills amounting to Rs.1,83,23,625/- and Rs.9,69,96,177/- during the same Financial Years. 2. Statements of Shir Ashok Kumar Singh, Partner were recorded and on conclusion of the inquiry it appeared to the Revenue that the Appellants have suppressed the material facts with intent to evade payment of duties and have evaded Service Tax amounting to Rs.4,74,66,698/- during the period from 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2014. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice dated 21.10.2014 was issued to the Appellants demanding Service Tax along with interest and penalty. In the first round of proceedings Order-In-Original dated 03.01.2017 was issued by the Commissioner confirming Service Tax of Rs.4,27,31,692/- along with interest and penalty. On an appeal filed by the Appellants this Bench vide Final Order No.70881 of 2019 dated 23.04.2019 remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority for afresh consideration. Accordingly, Order-In-Original in remand was passed vide Order dated 29.01.2021 confirming the demand of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Inter alia Residential Quarters/Colony Of 2*250 Mw Paricha Extension Project Construction of residential quarters for stay of employees & not for purpose of commerce or industry, hence, out of commercial construction service Relied on-Nitesh estates ltd. vs CCE, Bangalore-2015(40) STR 815 2. White Washing, Distempering & Painting Work in the aforesaid residential Colony Area at PTPP, Parichha Work done in residential colony area hence, not for purpose of commerce or industry hence, out of definition of commercial construction service 3. Raising of Ash-Dyke compartment A&B of Parichha Thermal power Project (PTPP), Parichha Mandatory obligation for preserving environment hence, not for purpose of commerce or industry. Relied on-Circular No. 80/10/2004-S.T.-Ann-13, dated 17-9-2004 4. Misc Civil work in Power House at PTPP, Parichha Falls under threshold exemption limit as per NN. 06/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005 2010-11 1. 1 to 3 as of year 2009-10 Same as discussed above 2. Contract at Sr.4 of 2009-10 Falls under threshold exemption limit as per NN. 06/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005 3. Development of Civil-work vide LOI no. 288/AUD/PTPP/T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Envirad Projects Pvt. Ltd Tax paid by principal contractor   Taxable value of 2013-14 overstated by Rs. 25,88,485/- which is double entry as appearing in 26 AS (194C& 194A) at Sl. No. 3 & 4 under details of payments received from M/s Suresh Chandra Gupta. Form 26AS of FY 2012-13 is enclosed as 2013-14 1. Deposited tax on all receipts accruing in 2013-14 except for one amount of Rs. 379,794/- realized from Envirad projects Pvt. Ltd. on which appellant will pay tax 6. Learned Counsel for the Appellants also submits that there was no willful misstatement or suppression of facts by the Appellants. Revenue has not discharged its responsibility to prove the same with evidences; the bona fides of the Appellants are evident from the fact that all the transactions are duly recorded in the books of accounts and extended period cannot be invoked as they entertained a bona fide belief that they are not liable to pay the Service Tax for the reasons cited above; as the issue pertains to interpretation of legal provisions, extended period cannot be invoked. 7. Shri A. K. Choudhary, learned Authorized Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther the same was rendered in the capacity of the main contractor or subcontractor. To that extent, we find that learned Adjudicating Authority has not appreciated the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in Nitesh Estates Ltd. (Supra). 12. In respect of the services rendered by the appellants regarding the residential quarters/colony for M/s Paricha Extension Project, they submit that it is a residential colony not used for commerce or industry and therefore they are not taxable. The counsel for the Appellants submits that the work undertaken by them was in respect of residential units which are not used for any commercial activity. We further find that he submits that the work was in relation to conservation of environment and therefore, reliance on Circular No.80/10/2004ST dated 17.09.2004 they are not taxable; certain activities undertaken during certain year falls under the threshold limit in terms of Notification No.06/2005 dated 01.03.2005; in some cases, the tax has been paid by principal contractor. The Service Tax has been paid by them availing abatement in terms of Notification No.01/2006-ST whereas the Revenue demanded Service Tax on the entire amount; the taxable v....