9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 6,74,452/- towards service tax. Further, it was observed that the assessee had not reflected correctly the amounts received from their customers in the ST-3 Returns filed by them for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08 and they had stopped filing ST-3 returns from April 2009 onwards. In response to the Revenue's letter dated 24.12.2010, the assessee submitted details of amounts received by them towards 'Construction of Residential Complex Service', vide their letters dated 19.5.2011 and 11.8.2011. In the aforesaid letters, the assessee contended that as per the master Circular dated 23.8.2007 and Circular No. 108/02/2009-S.T. dated 29.1.2009, they need not pay any service tax. 1.2. A study of the activities undertaken by the assessee revealed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owner of the flat) under a separate agreement and the ownership of the property did not remain with the builder but was already transferred to the proposed owner of the flat and the builder only constructs the flat as per the plan approved by the local authorities. 1.3. Proceedings were initiated which culminated in confirmation of demand of service tax of Rs. 74,34,231/- for the period from 2006-07 to 2010-11 with interest and penalties also have been imposed. 2. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant paid an amount of Rs. 6,74,452/- at the time of investigation of the case and requested that this amount may be treated as sufficient for purpose of hearing the appeal. He also submitted that prior to 1.7.2010, the appellant wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd despite queries from the Bench, learned counsel could not convince that this amount was not paid after collecting from customers and also could not indicate the date on which such payment was made. We also find this amount has not been appropriated by the original authority also. Therefore, this amount cannot be taken for adjustment with the amount payable subsequent to 1.7.2010. 5. As regards the period subsequent to 1.7.2010, the appellant has not made out a prima face case in their favour. At this stage, learned counsel agreed that the appellant would pay service tax with applicable interest and penalty for the period from 1.7.2010 onwards and the matter may be finally decided. Since we have already taken a view that prior to 1.7.201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
