9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 260 - AT - Service TaxLiability of sub-contractor - benefit of doubt - Section 80 of the FA, 1994 - CBE&C vide Circular No. 108/02/2009-ST dated 29.9.2009 - Held that - at the material time there were certain doubts regarding liability of Service Tax in relation to construction of a complex. The said clarification does not specifically states that there was any doubt regarding liability of sub-contractor in respect of services provided to main contractors. However, considering the similar nature of the service provider, invocation of Section 80 appears to be justified - penalties set aside - appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
1. Liability of Service Tax on sub-contractor. 2. Imposition of penalty under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. Interpretation of Board's Circular No. 108/02/2009-ST dated 29.1.2009. 4. Applicability of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. Analysis: Issue 1: Liability of Service Tax on sub-contractor The appellant, a sub-contractor for the main contractor, was not registered with the Service Tax department. A case was initiated proposing confirmation of demand, interest, and penalty under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant, though not contesting the Service Tax liability, argued that the interest amount was unpaid due to lack of awareness about the law at the material time. The appellant highlighted the confusion surrounding the liability of sub-contractors, which was later clarified by the Circular No. 108/02/2009-ST dated 29.1.2009. The Tribunal acknowledged the doubts regarding the liability of Service Tax concerning the construction of a complex but noted that the Circular did not specifically address the liability of sub-contractors. However, invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Tribunal set aside penalties under Sections 76 and 78, partially allowing the appeal. Issue 2: Imposition of penalty under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 The appellant faced penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for non-registration and non-payment of Service Tax interest. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the clarification provided by the Circular, decided to set aside penalties under Sections 76 and 78, invoking Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. This decision was based on the similarity of service provision by the sub-contractor to that of other service providers involved in construction activities. Issue 3: Interpretation of Board's Circular No. 108/02/2009-ST dated 29.1.2009 The Circular clarified various issues related to Service Tax on builders, emphasizing the distinction between 'self-service' and taxable services provided during the construction of residential complexes. While the Circular did not explicitly address the liability of sub-contractors, it provided insights into the nature of services and the applicability of Service Tax in the construction sector. The Tribunal considered the Circular's guidance in assessing the appellant's case and determining the appropriate course of action. Issue 4: Applicability of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 In this case, the Tribunal invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 to set aside penalties under Sections 76 and 78. Section 80 allows for the waiver of penalties if reasonable cause is established for the non-compliance. The Tribunal found the appellant's lack of awareness and the ambiguity surrounding the liability of sub-contractors as justifiable reasons to partially allow the appeal and relieve the appellant from certain penalties. This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues addressed and the Tribunal's decision in the case.
|
