9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 6.60 lakhs which was the balance to be paid by Shri Gangadharan who purchased the flat - Held that:- Merely because the appellant D. Prabhu had written a letter dated 13.7.2010 requesting the purchase to pay up the balance amount, the demand has been raised against the appellants herein - there is no logic of the department to issue such a notice against the appellants herein merely basing upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand of service tax and interest demanded by the authorities below alleging that the appellants have collected amount from a purchaser of the flat. 2. Brief facts are that the appellants herein were partners of M/s. Metro City Foundation who were engaged in construction of residential complexes. Shri Thiyagarajan and Smt. T. Sudha were the other partners of the firm. While the appellants her ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts, Shri S. Ramachandran, Consultant submitted that merely because the appellant Shri D. Prabhu has written a letter to the purchaser of the flat Shri Gangadharan, the present demand is raised against the appellants. In fact, the said purchaser had not paid the amount to the appellants and instead had paid the amount to the partnership firm / Shri Thiyagarajan. Since the amount paid is towards the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax on 25.7.2011 in regard to the amount of ₹ 6.60 lakhs which was the balance to be paid by Shri Gangadharan who purchased the flat. Merely because the appellat D. Prabhu had written a letter dated 13.7.2010 requesting the purchase to pay up the balance amount, the demand has been raised against the appellants herein. I do not find the logic of the department to issue such a notice agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
