9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 330X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id not fall under "Commercial or Industrial Construction Service" and therefore, did not take registration and pay service tax – Held that:- activities undertaken by them clearly relates to 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' - claim of the appellant is that they were under bona fide belief that their activities did not fall under 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' appears ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed out that they were liable to pay service tax. The original authority has confirmed the demand of service tax of Rs. 1,42,73,997/- under the head 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' relating to the period from 10.9.2004 to 31.3.2008 along with interest and imposed equal amount as penalty. 3. The learned Advocate submits that as they were paying VAT treating their activity as falling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vocate also pleads financial hardships on the ground that the appellant is a small time contractor and a proprietary concern. 4. The learned Jt. CDR submits that the activities undertaken by them clearly relates to 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' and there is no scope of any doubt and not to talk about a bona fide belief. When the applicant has not taken out registration and not f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merits or on time bar against the demand. However, the claim of the appellant for abatement of 67% in terms of Notification No. 1/2006-S.T dated 1.3.2006 is, prima facie , available to them. Taking entire facts and circumstances of the case into to the facts and circumstances of the case into account, we direct the appellant to deposit a further sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs only) within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
