9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bills and paid the Service Tax thereon under the category of Works Contract Service by opting for the composite scheme and the balance amount of Rs. 4,62,30,432/- remained to be adjusted on which service tax liability worked out to Rs. 18,67,340/-. On being pointed out by the audit, the appellant paid the amount of Rs. 18,67,340/- along with interest (as on 20/03/2007) amounting to Rs. 8,64,987/- on 26/02/2009. It was alleged that the appellant had suppressed the value of Rs. 4,62,30,432/- received as advance for the said project by not including the same in the ST-3 returns and had failed to discharge the service tax liability thereon under the category of Commercial or Industrial Construction Service in terms of Rule 6 (1) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ards rendition of service or towards goods and therefore, the appellants paid service tax at the time of raising of running bills. He further argued that with the introduction of composition scheme under works contract services on 01/06/2007 there were lot of confusion regarding the eligibility and the Honble Apex Court in the case of Nagarjuna Construction Co. Ltd. - 2012 (28) STR 561 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that when the assessee has already paid tax, they could not change classification of composite service to avail option under works contract service. CBEC also vide Circular No.98/1/2008-ST dated 04/01/2008 clarified that ongoing projects are not eligible for composition scheme. The learned Counsel relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service components of the works contract was notified. The appellant had received an advance in respect of a project, which was a works contract. At the material time there was a confusion regarding applicability of the tax and the mechanism. In these circumstances, the appellant failed to show the advance amount in their ST-3 return and failed to discharge tax on the same. On being pointed out the appellant paid the disputed service tax along with interest. While I find that there is a column for advances in the ST-3 return but the same was not declared by the appellant. I also find that there was a confusion at the material time with regard to the manner of payment of service tax in respect of newly introduced ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
