9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (4) TMI 912 - HC - Service TaxRecovery of service tax alongwith interest and penalty - works contract service provided by the petitioner between 01.10.2016 to 30.06.2017 - HELD THAT - The issue is now covered by the decision of the Division Bench of the Principal Seat in M/S. RAJU CONSTRUCTION, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, R. SURESH BABU, M/S. VENKATESWARA ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTIONS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MADESAN SIVAPRAKASAM, M. VEDIAPPAN, V. VENGAN VERSUS THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI, THE SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, O/O. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE, TRICHY REGIONAL UNIT, THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI 2022 (12) TMI 1336 - MADRAS HIGH COURT where it was held that The prayer for a direction to refund of tax already paid by the petitioner also cannot be countenanced as these petitioners are liable to tax. Therefore, wherever the Orders-in-Original have been passed, the respective petitioners are given liberty to file statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority subject to the compliance of the other requirements of pre-deposit the amount as is contemplated under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to the Finance Act, 1994, within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the appellate Commissioner under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Issues involved:
The petitioner challenged the impugned Order in Original No.68 of 2022 dated 31.10.2022 passed by the second respondent, regarding the demand of service tax on works contract services provided between 01.10.2016 to 30.06.2017. Judgment Details: 1. The impugned order confirmed the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 18,59,829/- on the petitioner for works contract services provided, along with interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 and penalties under Sections 78, 77(1)(a), 77(1)(c), and 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The Division Bench decision in W.P.No.24996 of 2019 dated 30.11.2022 stated that petitioners can file statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, subject to compliance with pre-deposit requirements under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 3. Following the above decision, the Court in W.P.(MD) No.6852 of 2024 dated 21.03.2024 dismissed the Writ Petition but granted liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the appellate Commissioner under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.
|
