9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand included the amount received prior to 10.09.2004,. Consultant could not contradict the submissions made by . A.R. that the deduction has already been allowed for the amount received prior to 10.09.2004. - stay granted partly. - ST/329/2012 - S/2117/WZB/AHD/2012 - Dated:- 21-9-2012 - B.S.V. Murthy, J. Appellant Rep by: Shri R R Dave, Consultant Respondent Rep by: Shri P N Sarvai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uded. Further, he also submits that the contract has to be treated as Works Contract and therefore there is no liability for the period prior to 01.06.2007. He also submits that the financial condition of the appellant is very bad and the appellant is not in a position to make any pre-deposit. 3. Ld.A.R. would submit that the lower authorities have considered the amount relating to the period pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the deduction has already been allowed for the amount received prior to 10.09.2004. As regards the financial difficulty, I have gone through the Income Tax return for the year 2010-2011 and I find that acceding to the Income Tax return, the appellant had invested in equity shares amounting to more than Rs.4.7 lakhs. In view of the fact that the demand of Service Tax is of Rs.2.31 lakhs, it canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
