9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not liable to service tax in view of the CBEC circular cited by the appellant. There is also force in the contention of the appellant that the value of goods was not includible in the assessable value. The taxability of the other services rendered requires a careful examination. We do note that in the case of BG Shirke Construction vs CCE, Pune [2013 (2) TMI 584 - CESTAT MUMBAI] CESTAT granted sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent : Shri Govind Dixit, DR ORDER Per R K Singh The Stay Application along with Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Original dated 26.03.2013 in terms of which the service tax demand of ₹ 94,23,765/- was confirmed along with interest and equal mandatory penalty on the ground that the appellant had provided Commercial or Industrial Construction Service (CICS) and Cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cricket Association would not qualify to be covered under CICS as it was not meant for commercial purpose and that the demand on that score is ₹ 7,04,466/-. (iii) It provided construction services to the units located in special economic zones and such service was exempt under Notification No. 4/2004-ST, dated 31/03/2004 and the demand on that score was ₹ 3,80,791/-. (iv) It construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1) STR 52 (Tri - Mumb)] CESTAT granted stay in respect of construction of the sports stadium stating that this prima facie would not be covered under the scope of CICS. We also notice that the appellant has deposited ₹ 26,45,334/- towards the impugned service tax liability. 4. In the given circumstances, we are the of the view that the amount already deposited meets the requirement of sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
