9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 2102 - AT - Service TaxLiability of Service Tax Work Contract prior to period of 1.6.2007 and after 1.6.2007 - Same has invoked longer period of limitation and SCN was issued after the issuance of first show-cause notice Held That - Matter remanded back to Commissioner (A) Matter to be decided in reference to the case of Nizam Sugar Factory vs. CCE 2006 (4) TMI 127 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Appeal Disposed of.
Issues Involved: Determination of liability to service tax on work contracts prior to 1.6.2007; application of legal decisions on time limitation for show-cause notices.
Analysis: 1. Liability of Works Contract for Period Prior to 1.6.2007: The main issue in both appeals was whether work contracts could be held liable for service tax before 1.6.2007 when the tax was introduced. The Tribunal noted that the legal issue had been extensively discussed and was ultimately decided by a Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of CCE & C vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. The Tribunal observed that the benefit of this decision was not considered by the Commissioner (A). While one case involved a period exclusively before 1.6.2007, the other appeal related to a subsequent period. The advocate argued that the longer period of limitation applied, and the show-cause notice was issued after the first notice, invoking the decision in Nizam Sugar Factory vs. CCE. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the Commissioner (A) for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's decision, emphasizing the need to determine liability for works contracts prior to 1.6.2007. 2. Application of Legal Decisions on Time Limitation: Although the Tribunal did not delve into other arguments raised by the assessee, it focused on the limited issue of liability for works contracts before 1.6.2007. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner (A) to reconsider the matter in view of the Supreme Court's decision and also to address the point of limitation based on the ruling in Nizam Sugar Factory. Both the stay petition and the appeal were disposed of accordingly, with the Tribunal emphasizing the importance of applying relevant legal decisions in determining liability and time limitations for show-cause notices.
|
