9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efly stated, are as under: The appellants are a joint venture of NTPC and Reliance Infrastructures Ltd. They provided various services to NTPC and RITES. They were issued a Show Cause Notice demanding service tax amounting to Rs. 1,59,97,633/- along with interest and penalties. Vide aforesaid Order-in-Original a part of the demand raised in the Show Cause Notice was dropped. The details regarding the demand confirmed are given below: CATEGORY OF SERVICE WISE BIFURFICATION OF TOTAL TAXABLE RECEIPTS S. No Particulars Category of service Taxable value Service tax payable as per the impugned order Demand admitted and deposited by the appellant Demand contested in the present Appeal a) & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lved, the fact that more than Rs. 59 lacs have already been deposited and with the consent of both sides, we proceed to decide the appeal waiving pre-deposit. 4. The appellants have contended that in respect of the construction of guest house building for NTPC in respect of which a demand of Rs. 15,10,283/- has been confirmed, the adjudicating authority has not taken into account and discussed their contentions and has not even come to a clear finding whether the said demand has been confirmed under construction of complex service or under commercial or industrial construction service. We find that in para 4.8 of the adjudication order, the adjudicating authority has discussed the issue regarding the taxability of the service relating to c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss amount charged. The appellants have contended that in the light of the judgment of the larger bench of the Tribunal in case of Bhayana Builders, the value of free supplies in any case is not includible for the purpose of permitting 67% abatement under Notification No. 15/2004-ST or Notification No. 1/2006-ST. We find force in this contention of the appellants that the adjudicating authority needs to now take into account the judgment of the said CESTAT in case of M/s. Bhayana Builders 2013 (32) STR 49 (Tri.-LB) to re-adjudicate this component of the demand. While doing so the adjudicating authority will, inter alia, need to consider as to what part, if any, of this component of demand relates to completion or finishing work because in ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
