9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd for the period 2009-10 is within the normal period of limitation and the benefit of the Notification No. 12/2003-ST is not available to applicants as he had not produced evidence by way of invoices under which the goods were sold to the service recipient - against assessee. Claim of Notification No. 1/2006-ST - The applicants availed credit of service tax in respect of the input service to the extent of about Rs. 30 lakhs, in these circumstances, the applicants have not made out a prima facie case for total waiver of the dues, thus the applicants are directed to deposit Rs One crore within eight weeks and report compliance on 03.12.2012. - ST/513/12 - S/1155/2012/CSTB/C-I - Dated:- 12-9-2012 - S S Kang And Sahab Singh, JJ. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vity of trading is also held as liable to service tax. 6. In respect of the contracts which are in respect of erection, commissioning or installation, the contention is that the applicants had supplied materials under the contract as per the details given in the contract. Therefore, the cost of material is not to be taken into consideration for the purpose of levy of service tax on erection, commissioning or installation charges in view of Notification No.12/2003-ST. 7. In the alternative, the contention of the applicant is that another Notification No. 1/2006-ST provides abatement to the extent of 67% from the gross amount received in respect of taxable service. It is also submitted that invocation of the extended period is not sustain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontention of the Revenue is that the benefit of notification is available in case no credit has been availed, by the service provider. The applicant availed credit in respect of credit. Hence the benefit of the notification is not available. 12. In respect of the time bar issue, the contention of the Revenue is that the applicant never disclosed that the contract was for lump sum amount. Therefore, the extended period has been rightly invoked. 13. We find that in the present case, there is no issue of taxability of the service. The issue is regarding commutation (sic) of assessable value of the service. Applicants are paying 10%/15% of the value of the service. The Revenue has taken the gross amount received for providing taxable servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the course of erection, commissioning or installation subject to the condition that the credit in respect of duty paid on inputs/capital goods or the Cenvat credit of service tax on input services has not been taken. In the present case, the admitted fact is that the applicants availed credit of service tax in respect of the input service to the extent of about Rs. 30 lakhs, In these circumstances, the applicants have not made out a prima facie case for total waiver of the dues. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants are directed to deposit Rs One crore within eight weeks and report compliance on 03.12.2012. On compliance, we waive pre-deposit of the balance amount of service tax, interest and penalti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
