2024 (1) TMI 825 - AT - Service Tax

Invocation of extended period of limitation - execution of works contracts for the Government Department - it is alleged that relevant details were not provided with supporting documents before the Adjudicating Authority - HELD THAT - Under the admitted facts and circumstances, almost the whole turnover of the Appellant is exempted, except the amount for construction of school building for Rs. 8,44,300/- which also qualifies for exemption under the Notification No. 33/2012-ST (SSI). It is further found that the services provided for the construction of road and for irrigation project are also exempted under Notification No. 25/2012-ST. - it is further found that the Show Cause Notice have been wrongly issued invoking the extended period of limitation, there being no element of any fraud, mis-representation or mis-statement in the facts of this case. The impugned order set aside - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the invocation of extended period of limitation in the Show Cause Notice, demand for service tax, exemption under specific notifications, and lack of evidence for certain works.

Extended period of limitation:
The Service Tax Department issued a Show Cause Notice invoking the extended period of limitation based on information received from the Income Tax Department. The Appellant argued that the Notice was bad for invoking the extended period as they were registered with VAT and Income Tax, maintained proper accounts, and had no taxable turnover under Service Tax provisions. The Tribunal found that the Notice was wrongly issued without any element of fraud or misrepresentation.

Demand for service tax:
The Appellant contested the demand for service tax, stating that almost all their turnover was exempted under specific notifications. The Tribunal observed that the turnover related to construction of a school building qualified for exemption under Notification No. 33/2012-ST (SSI), while the services provided for construction of roads and irrigation projects were also exempted under Notification No. 25/2012-ST. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order.

Exemption under specific notifications:
The Tribunal analyzed the nature of works carried out by the Appellant, such as construction of a school building, black topping of roads, and irrigation works. It was noted that these works fell under specific exemptions provided in Notification No. 33/2012-ST and Notification No. 25/2012-ST. The Tribunal found that the demands were confirmed without proper consideration of the exemptions, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the Appellant.

Lack of evidence for certain works:
The Appellant provided evidence and documentation regarding the nature of works done for the Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and the Priyadarshini Jurala Project. Despite producing agreements and relevant records, the demands were confirmed alleging lack of evidence. The Tribunal observed that there was no suppression or refusal on the part of the Appellant to produce necessary documents, leading to the impugned order being set aside.