2015 (11) TMI 622 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - Works Contract Services & Construction of Residential Complex Services - Held that - Appellant did not co-operate during the investigation and adjudication proceedings. Various points raised by the appellant in the grounds of this appeal as well as during the course of hearing were not brought out and argued before the Adjudicating authority. The matter is, therefore, required to be remanded to the Adjudicating authority for fresh consideration. However, it is also observed that appellant has not co-operated with the Adjudicating authority during the course of adjudication proceedings Appellant is thus required to be put to some condition so that appellant takes the adjudication proceedings seriously. - Partial stay granted.

Summary

Issues Involved: Service tax demand, interest, penalties under Section 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, non-cooperation during investigation and adjudication proceedings, remand to the Adjudicating authority, deposit requirement, Stay Petition disposal.

Service Tax Demand, Interest, and Penalties:
The appellant filed an appeal against Order-in-Original confirming a service tax demand of Rs. 3,43,67,670 along with interest and penalties under Section 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant argued that they provided taxable services under Works Contract Services & Construction of Residential Complex Services. The main contractors had already paid service tax liability on the services rendered. The Revenue contended that the appellant, as a service provider, must discharge service tax at the appropriate rate. It was mentioned that if the main contractor pays service tax, the appellant's payment as a sub-contractor can be taken as CENVAT Credit by the main contractor.

Non-Cooperation and Remand to Adjudicating Authority:
The Tribunal observed that the appellant did not cooperate during the investigation and adjudication proceedings. It was noted that the appellant did not file any reply to the show cause notice and kept asking for time. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the Adjudicating authority for fresh consideration due to the lack of cooperation. However, the Tribunal also highlighted that the appellant needed to be put under certain conditions to take the adjudication proceedings seriously. As a result, the appellant was ordered to deposit Rs. 15.00 Lakh within eight weeks and report compliance to the Adjudicating authority. The Tribunal clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the case's merits, leaving all issues open for the Adjudicating authority to deliberate upon after providing an opportunity for the appellant to explain their case.

Stay Petition Disposal:
The Stay Petition filed by the appellant was disposed of, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand to the Adjudicating authority. This decision allowed for a fresh consideration of the case with the condition of the appellant making the specified deposit and cooperating with the adjudication proceedings.

This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the service tax demand, interest, penalties, non-cooperation issues, remand to the Adjudicating authority, deposit requirement, and the disposal of the Stay Petition, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal proceedings and outcomes.