9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered the three parameters required to be considered viz., prima facie case, hardship and interest of the Revenue and passed the order. Thus, in the absence of any error in the discretion exercised by the CESTAT, we find no ground to interfere with such order. The time for compliance of the direction of the CESTAT viz., the payment, of pre-deposit of ₹ 40,00,000/- is extended by six weeks - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ptember 2009. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant, demanding Service Tax short-paid. On adjudication, the Service Tax of ₹ 1,15,73,087/- was ultimately demanded along with interest, and penalty. Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called as the CESTAT ) along with application for waiver of pre-d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruction, the possession of constructed area was handed over to the persons to whom undivided shares of land were sold. Therefore, it was submitted that it was clear that, the construction activity was undertaken on the land already registered in the name of the client and therefore, service was being provided by the appellant to such clients. Further., the Revenue placed reliance on the earlier de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order, it appears that there was a typographical mistake. The decision of the CESTAT in the case of LCS City Makers v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai reported in 2013 (30) S.T.R. 33 was against the assessee therein, wherein, the Tribunal held that there was a service element and Service Tax was leviable. Therefore, by applying the said decision to the appellant's case, the Tribunal was o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
