TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 839
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... M/s. Skylink Construction Pvt. Ltd. [the respondent/assessee] is registered with the Service Tax Department for providing services of construction services other than residential complex, including commercial/industrial buildings or civil structures and construction of residential complex services and is regularly filing ST-3 Returns. On the basis of investigation carried out by the Department, show cause notice dated 22.04.2016 was issued raising demand of Rs.5,29,39,121 along with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the learned Commissioner confirmed the demand limited to Rs.66,38,753 only and dropped the remaining demand. The details thereof are as under: Issue Period Demand proposed in SCN Demand confirmed in OIO I. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the completion certificate and not occupancy certificate. (iii) The AA has erred in dropping the demand on the issue of 'advances.' These 'Advances' were reflected under 'Current liabilities' instead of Short/Long term borrowings. (iv) The AA has erred in dropping the demand pertaining to the 300 houses at Sainik Vihar related to Meerut Development Authority without any scrutiny of the completion certificate." 4. Mr. Siddharth Malhotra, learned Counsel for the respondent has raised preliminary issue that the appeal has been filed beyond the period of four months which is time barred being beyond the period specified under Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944 and no ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Noticee in respect of Flats other than Meerut Development Authority;" 6. The Revenue has limited the arguments to the issues as specified in the synopsis as under: "Whether the party is chargeable to service tax on advances received which are mentioned in balance sheet as "advances against booking of property" under the category of "construction of Residential Complex Service" and whether the completion certificate produced by the respondent can be considered valid calculating service tax liability." 7. In the show notice, the allegation is that advances were received for various purposes and towards development or construction of the residential properties. We find that the Commissioner has considered the agreement, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isions of Section 67(2) of the Act which specifically provides that where tax is not separately recovered, the gross amount shall be treated as inclusive of tax. It is not the case of the Revenue that separate recovery of tax has been made by the appellant. 9. The next issue raised by the Department is that the certificate relied upon by the assessee is merely an occupancy certificate and not the completion certificate. In this regard, we find that the learned Commissioner has specifically observed that the copy of the completion certificate issued by MCD, Delhi was rejected by the investigating officer only on the ground of not producing the original certificate. Further, it has been noted that vide letter dated 25.03.2018, the appellan....