Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2010 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (1) TMI 604 - AT - Service TaxWaiver of pre-deposit - appellant relocated ball mill in Iron Ore Project - appellant supplying the materials and undertaking by engaging his own labour - benefit of notification No. 12/2003-S.T, as they are also supplied materials limitation - appellant has not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of the amounts adjudged by the lower authorities pre-deposit partly waived
Issues: Stay application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax, interest, and penalties; determination of service tax liability for providing services of "Erection, Maintenance and Installation" in a project; consideration of whether the contract is a 'Works Contract'; dispute regarding the supply of materials for relocation of ball mill; applicability of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T.; challenge under limitation; prima facie case for complete waiver of adjudged amounts; direction for pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal.
In this case, a stay application was filed seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax, interest, and penalties amounting to specific figures. The service tax liability arose from the provision of services related to "Erection, Maintenance and Installation," specifically in the relocation of a ball mill in a project. The appellant contended that the entire contract fell under the category of a 'Works Contract,' subject to value-added tax payment. The appellant argued that the issue was time-barred due to the delay between project execution and the issuance of a show cause notice. The respondent, however, disputed the extent of materials supplied by the appellant for the ball mill relocation. The Tribunal considered the submissions and records, noting that the appellant had supplied labor and materials for the project, raising questions about the applicability of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. and the issue of limitation. The Tribunal concluded that a detailed examination was necessary during the final hearing, and while the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case for complete waiver, a partial pre-deposit of a specified amount was directed within a set timeframe. Upon compliance, the Tribunal stayed the recovery of the remaining amounts pending the appeal's disposal, emphasizing the importance of addressing the time bar issue and the benefit of the notification to the appellant.
|