9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri N.R. Bhaskar, SCGSC, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The petitioner carries on construction activity and in the process though not liable to pay service tax under Finance Act, 1994, nevertheless paid amounts through T.R.-6 challans as detailed below: Sl. No. TR 6 Challan No. Date Amount Paid 1 2005-06 14-12-2005 2381272 2 2005-06 14-12-2005 1246075 3 2005-06 7-1-2006 2396592 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es are not taxable, being non-commercial in nature. Since this clarification issued by the Board vide Circular No. 80/10/2004 dated 17-9-2004 is very clear on the issue, the construction services undertaken by M/s. K.V.R. Construction is not taxable in nature and the assessee is not liable to pay any service tax and he has paid it under the misunderstading of law. Since the amount collected by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, on an erroneous assumption that Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 provided application of the Central Excise Act 1944, for short 'Act' to service tax matters, relating to refund under Section 11B of the Act, rejected the refund claim as filed beyond the period of limitation under the said Section, denying the petitioners Rs. 1,23,96,948/- (Rs. 68,65,439 + Rs. 55,31,509). Hence this p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and not as a duty, therefore, there was no necessity for the petitioner to have made a claim invoking Section 11B of the Act for refund. 6. In the circumstances, the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise by a misconception of law assumed that Section 11-B of the Act applied, so as to decline the petitioner's claim for refund of the amount in deposit, on the premise that the claim was beyond th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
