9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1994 for evasion of service tax in contravention of the provisions of Rules, 4,5,6 and 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. 2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Pyramid Colonizer Pvt. Ltd. started booking of flats from August, 2010, those flats were to be delivered in three years time. The Central Excise officers visited the premises of the appellant on 16.8.2011 and during search it was noticed that the appellant was engaged in 'construction of residential complex services' defined under section 65 (105) (zzzh) of Finance Act, 1994 an have not discharged their service tax liability on the services rendered by them under the said category. They have neither got registered with the department under the Service Tax Act nor filed any re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers, or hidden records has been mentioned in the impugned order. In fact the impugned order itself that the demand was worked out on the basis of the records of the appellant. Further, the appellant themselves provided figures, month wise, with proof of deposit of Service Tax+Ed.Cess+SHE Cess. Further the appellant, immediately applied for the registration under the provisions of the finance act, 1994, once they were informed about their tax liability. I have also noted that the appellant has informed that they were new entrant in the trade of construciton of the residential complexes. The appellant has nowhere disputed their tax liability, they are only opposing the imposition of the penalty. I am of the opinion that the builder was under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of waiving penalty imposed upon the appellant. 6. Ld. Representative of the respondent appeared and submitted that the appellant is a small company. The respondents did not even collect/charge any service tax from the persons to whom services were rendered on the bonafide belief that no service tax was payable on such services. Therefore, they had no intention to evade service tax and had not evaded the payment of service tax. He submitted that the appellant had fully co-operated with the officers during the inquiry and provided necessary records. The respondents had submitted all the details which were true and correct and further demonstrated the bonafide and honest intention of the appellant. Reference was made to first proviso to sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made on 1.7.2010 whereby Explanation was added to the said clause:- Explanation.- For the purposes of this subclause, construction of a complex which is intended for sale, wholly or partly, by a builder or any person authorized by the builder before, during or after construction (except in cases for which no sum is received from or on behalf of the prospective buyer by the builder or a person authorized by the builder before the grant of completion certificate by the authority competent to issue such certificate under any law for the time being in force) shall be deemed to be service provided by the builder to the buyer. 10. It is observed that this amendment was effective from 1.7.2010. Visit to the factory by the officers was on 16.8.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
