2009 (9) TMI 723 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit - benefit of N/N. 15/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004 as amended by N/N. 19/2005-S.T., dated 7-6-2005 claimed by the assessee has been disallowed on the ground that what they were rendering was not Erection, Commission or Installation service eligible to the benefit of 67% abatement but only Completion and Finishing Service in the form of structural glazing - Held that - The contention of the assessees that what they are doing is sound installation which is also covered by the definition Erection, Commissioning or Installation service is not prima facie acceptable as they are doing structural glazing including installation services of glass cladding etc. which do not come within the scope of Erection, Commissioning and Installation service and are prima facie excluded from the benefit of Notification No. 15/04 as amended - the appellants directed to predeposit a sum of ₹ 55,000/- within a period of four weeks from today - appeal dismissed.

Summary

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI heard an application for waiver of predeposit of service tax of Rs. 1,06,036/- confirmed on the grounds of rendering service under the category of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction' services from April 2005 to September 2005. The benefit of certain notifications claimed by the assessee was disallowed, as the services provided were deemed to be 'Completion and Finishing Service' rather than 'Erection, Commission or Installation' services. The Tribunal directed the appellants to predeposit Rs. 55,000 within four weeks, after which the predeposit of the balance tax and interest would be waived, and recovery stayed pending the appeal. Failure to comply would result in the vacation of the stay and dismissal of the appeal. Compliance was to be reported on 3rd November 2009. The Tribunal did not find the arguments raised by the assessees regarding the notifications and service categories to be prima facie acceptable, and therefore directed the predeposit. The appeal was to be dismissed if the appellants failed to comply with the predeposit directive.