2018 (2) TMI 1617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t paid the service tax in spite of the fact that they have not collected the same from their customers - Moreover, the issue relating to construction of complex services has been subject of litigation before various courts and the appellant was justified in not paying the service tax till it was pointed out by the Revenue. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Mr. S.S. Garg, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Amit Agarwal, Consultant, for Appellant Shri S.R. Nair, E.O. (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: S.S. Garg The appellants have filed these three appeals against the common impugned order dated 25.7.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Penalty of ₹ 20,000/- was imposed on all the three appellants under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, ₹ 10,000/- on all the appellants under Section 77(1)(a) of the Act and equal penalty of ₹ 10,78,810/-, ₹ 3,95,884/- and ₹ 19,07,318/- respectively under Section 78 of the Act with an option to pay 25% of the penalty as provided in the first proviso to Section 78 ibid. Aggrieved by the order-in-original, the appellants preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) after following due process has rejected the appeal of the appellants. Hence the present appeals. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned consultant for the appellants submitted that the impug .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Section 66 of the Act could be charged in respect of the composite contracts. He relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Suresh Kumar Bansal Vs. UOI - 2016 (43) STR 3 (Del.). He also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry vs. UOI - 2012 (s5) STR 305 (Bom.) and also cited the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CCE Vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. - 2015 (39) STR 913 (SC), to show that the issue relates to interpretation of the leviability of service tax. 5. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both parties and on perusal of the records and the judgments relied upon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X