TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 926
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) and Managing Director namely Shri Prem Adip Rishi. 1.1 Briefly stated, the facts relevant for the present adjudication are that M/s MVL limited is holding service tax registration being engaged in providing "Construction of Complex Services". Revenue got an intelligence that the appellant is providing the said services as builder/ developer by way of building residential flats and was also charging external development charges, parking charges, power backup charges, preferential location charges, interest free maintenance security, meter charges and sewer treatment plant charges for the residential projects to be constructed. 1.2 The appellant company was asked to provide the details. Based on the documents submitted and the statement of the Director, Shri Rakesh Gupta, it was observed that the appellant is liable to pay service tax of rupees 12,29,16,928/- against the taxable services provided by them during the period from August 2010 to March 2015. The amount of service tax as was deposited, post audit objection, amounting to Rs 1,41,57,357/- was without including the various amount as that of car parking charges in the taxable value. The service tax returns for the peri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....above). 3.2 It is further submitted that the appellant is not liable to pay Service Tax as was also mentioned in the reply to show cause notice dated 22.12.2016, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Suresh Kumar Bansal V/s Union of India reported as 2016 (6)TMI 192 wherein it was held that in absence of any mechanism for determining the service component in the composite contract, the levy would not be sustainable. The demand, therefore, has wrongly been confirmed against the appellant. Ld. Counsel has objected the impugned order for the following reasons also: (a) The basis for the computation of the service tax demand had not been clearly set out in the notice. (b) Without prejudice to the main argument, it was submitted that the composite agreements entered into with the buyers involved both the supply of services and materials and therefore could not be classified under 'Construction of Complex Service'. In light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Larsen & Toubro Ltd. reported in 2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.), the more appropriate classification would be under 'Works Contract Service'. Accordingly....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tificate dated 11.05.2010 as the company was incorporated only on 24.04.2012. The director of said D Mason's Consortium Pvt. Ltd. denied to ever worked for M/s MVL Ltd. On finding the certificate to be bogus that the director of M/s MVL/ co-appellant Shri Rakesh Gupta were even arrested. The proper completion certificates were never produced by the appellant. 4.2 The appellant even after getting registered, was not discharging the proper service tax liability as all the additional amounts as were collected by the appellant from the buyers of the flats (EDC etc.) were not included a gross taxable value. Even the service tax returns were not filed in time. The instant case is not a case of interpretation of law or prevailing legal confusion regarding the taxability rather it is a clear case of suppression with intent to evade service tax. The appellant had neither obtained the Service Tax registration nor admittedly filed returns as provided under the law within the stipulated period & had obtained Service Tax registration for Bhiwadi site only after initiation of the proceedings by the department against them. The appellant would have escaped from the tax net had the Anti-evasion....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt exchequer. These observations are sufficient for us to hold that the appellant has committed an act of suppressing material facts with a definite intent to evade the payment of service tax. Hence, it is held that extended period of limitation has rightly been invoked by the revenue while issuing the impugned show cause notice. 6. The penalty of section 76 of Finance act 1994 read with rule 7C of Service Tax Rules, 1994 for not filing the returns with the stipulated period along with late fee has also been rightly confirmed. Since four of the appellants were aware of their liability still not discharged the same, it is held that the penalty on three of the appellants under section 77 and 78 of the Finance acts also been rightly confirmed, by the adjudicating authority below, the act of the appellants was deliberate. We rely upon the decision of High Court Ahmedabad in the case of M/s Stemcyte India Therapeutics Pvt. Ltd V/s Commissioner of central excise & service tax, Ahmedabad-III reported in 2025 INSC 841 wherein it was held that deliberate act on part of assesses to evade payment of tax is sufficient to invoke the extended period of limitation while issuing the SCN and for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... property. It was also provided to dispose of all the pending cases as per the circular. 10. Thereafter, Union Budget was presented on 26th February, 2010 for the year 2010-2011 which introduced clauses 75 and 76 in the Finance Act, 2010 which provided changes in Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 by inserting additional entries for levy of service tax being Section 65(105)(zzq), Section 65(105)zzzh) and new Entry 65(105)(zzzzu) on the commercial and industrial construction and construction of residential complex before obtaining the completion certificate from the competent authority and special services provided by the builder to prospective buyers such as providing preferential location or external or internal development of the complexes, it was clarified that any person who constructs buildings for his own use or renting or for selling it subsequently, will not be subjected to service tax as levy of service tax primarily depends upon the rendering of service by a person called service provider and rendering of service to another person by service provider i.e. service receiver. 11. Circular No. 81/6/2005-TRU, dated 27th July, 2005 issued by the Ministry of Finance to all....