9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (1) TMI 229 - AT - Service TaxErection, Commissioning and Installation Services claim of appellants that the main contractors had paid service tax in respect of the above service and, therefore, nothing requires to be paid by them because they are only sub-contractor, is acceptable but appellant has also raised the plea of limitation in respect of a part of the demand hence stay partly granted
Issues:
Service tax demand on 'Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services' for the period September, 2004 to March, 2006; Imposition of penalties; Claim of main contractors paying service tax; Plea of limitation; Pre-deposit amount determination. Analysis: The Commissioner of Service Tax issued a demand for service tax exceeding Rs. 1.7 crores on the appellants for 'Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services' for the period September, 2004 to March, 2006, along with penalties. The demand pertained to sub-contracts executed by the appellants for main contractors - M/s. Alstom Power Projects Ltd, M/s. Toyo Engineering India Ltd, and M/s. Technip India Ltd. The appellants argued that the main contractors had already paid service tax for the services in question, supported by certificates from the main contractors. The appellants contended that the Range Officer had the opportunity to verify these facts during 2005-06. The appellants also raised the issue of limitation regarding a part of the demand, specifically related to the sub-contract awarded by M/s. Technip India Ltd. Upon examination of the submissions, the tribunal directed the appellants to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 7.7 lakhs within 4 weeks, with a compliance report due on 3-3-2008. The pre-deposit could be made through the reversal of Cenvat credit. The tribunal noted the absence of concrete proof supporting the appellants' claim, emphasizing the need for the pre-deposit as a preliminary measure. The decision aimed to address the pending service tax demand, particularly concerning the sub-contract awarded by M/s. Technip India Ltd, within the specified time frame, ensuring compliance with the tribunal's directive.
|
