9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iginal authority confirmed the demand, interest and imposed penalties. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Learned Counsel Ms. A S K Swetha appeared and argued the matter. The demand is confirmed under Commercial or Industrial Construction Services. She furnished the samples of the work orders, and submitted that the appellant had carried out the works as sub-contractor to various other main contractors. The work executed was mainly piling works. Such works are in the nature of composite contracts and therefore the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd., would apply for the period prior to 01.06.2007. Though the customers had provided cement and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The demand has been raised against the appellant on such amount also as a sub-contractor. She conceded that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Melange Developers Pvt Ltd., [2019 (6) TMI 518] has held that the subcontractor is also liable to pay service tax. However the entire demand has been raised invoking extended period as there is no evidence to establish suppression of facts with intend to evade payment of tax. She submitted that the issue is entirely interpretational and there is no positive act of suppression on the part of the appellant. The demand raised invoking the extended period cannot sustain. She prayed that the appeal may be allowed. 5. Learned AR Shri L.V. Rao appeared on behalf of the department. He supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accountant is also produced to show that apart from steel and cement other materials have also been used. On perusal of this certificate, we find that the appellant has used consumables to the amount of Rs. 38,01,188/- in financial year 2004-05 and Rs. 26,62,871/- in 2005-06. There is also purchases of brick, wood and other items which have been used for executing the work orders. Thus, it is established that the contracts are composite in nature. There upon the decision in the case of Larsen & Toubro (supra) would apply to the period prior to 01.06.2007 and therefore the demand cannot sustain. For the period after 01.06.2007 the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Real Value Promoters (supra) as followed in P. Balakrishnan Vs Thirunalv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
