9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 998 - AT - Service TaxDemand prior to 1-6-2007 - Whether the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax in respect of joint development of residential complex in respect of the portion of the flats handed over to the land owner - Held that - requirement of 50% of the pre-deposit ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals) is very reasonable and at this stage, learned consultant undertakes to deposit the amount and requests that the appeal may be remanded. Accordingly, we waive the requirement of pre-deposit and take up the appeal itself. In view of the fact that appeal has been dismissed for non-compliance and the consultant undertakes to deposit the amount, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue on merits subject to the condition that the appellant deposited 50% of the Service Tax demanded - Following decision of LCS City Makers Pvt. Ltd. v. CST 2012 (6) TMI 363 - CESTAT, CHENNAI - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues involved: Non-compliance with pre-deposit requirement, liability to pay Service Tax for joint development of residential complex.
Analysis: - The appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement of 50%. - The consultant argued that the demand for the period before 1-6-2007 should not be sustained as the service should be considered a 'works contract' before that date. - The main issue was whether the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax for the joint development of a residential complex, specifically for the portion of flats handed over to the landowner. - The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in LCS City Makers Pvt. Ltd. v. CST, where the outcome was against the assessee. - Considering the circumstances, the Tribunal found the 50% pre-deposit requirement reasonable and allowed the consultant to deposit the amount, leading to the remand of the appeal. - The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits, with the condition that the appellant must deposit 50% of the Service Tax demanded within eight weeks and report compliance. This detailed analysis covers the key issues addressed in the judgment, including non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement and the liability to pay Service Tax for a joint development project.
|
