9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in, Authorised Representative for the respondent ORDER ASHOK JINDAL: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim has been rejected on the ground that the appellant has failed to pass the bar of unjust enrichment. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the activity of construction of residential complex awarded by the Rajasthan Housing B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd is providing for construction of residential complexes, which are exempted from the payment of service tax and the agreed price was cum duty price, therefore, no service tax was paid by the appellant. In these circumstances, it is prayed that bar of unjust enrichment is not applicable. Hence, refund claim be allowed. 4. On the other hand, learned Authorised Representative for the Department su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... van service etc., the agreement between the appellant and Madhya government there was fixed price and if any service tax is payable, that shall be borne by the appellant. On the premise that activity of providing mobile health van is covered under rent-a-cab service, the appellant paid Service Tax thereon but on receipt of letter from the Asstt. Central Excise and Service Tax Division, Bhopal tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is not disputed that as per the agreement between the appellant and the Rajasthan Government the construction of housing complex which was on agreed price, if any, service tax is payable, the same shall be payable by the appellant which means the amount of service tax is included in the value of service provided, if any, payable as no service tax is payable by the appellant. Therefore, question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
