9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case, in a nutshell is, that appellant sought for refund of Rs. 45,13,475/- for the period between October, 2011 and March, 2012 for the service category of "construction of complex service - residential complex" classifiable under Section 65 (91a) of the Finance Act, 1994 but was issued with deficiency memo and show-cause notice on several grounds that were ultimately adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Division - IV, Mumbai-II, resulting in rejection of its refund claim vide Order-in- Original No. ST-II/Div.IV/164-R/2012 dated 30.11.2012. In the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the said order was confirmed on the ground that appellant failed to establish construction of less than 12 residential units ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tiated was erroneous and required to be set aside. 4. In response to such submissions, learned Authorised Representative for the respondent-department Mr. Onil Shivadikar, Assistant Commissioner has submitted orally and through his subsequently filed written submissions that ground plan submitted by the appellant was incomplete and admission of appellant in the refund claim application that he received Service Tax in advance from prospective customers would disentitle the appellant to get the claimed refund besides the fact that in view of CESTAT judgement in the case of Nukay Nufit Nakshtra Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III reported in 2015-TIOL-607-CESTAT-MUM, that pending enquiry if the appellant discharged the service tax li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Service Tax for Bandra unit. And the third point which is raised by the learned respondent-department with reference to CESTAT's own decision, though was pronounced in a different fact and circumstances, is also hit by Rule 10 of the CESTAT Procedure Rule, 1982 as has not been argued during the hearing of the petition. Therefore, the only aspect that is required to be dealt in this appeal is the establishment of construction of less than 12 units by the appellant in the disputed complex. On this aspect, it is required to reproduce relevant portion of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) at para 8 of the Order-in-Appeal which reads: "The appellants have produced voluminous documents in this regard viz. agreement copy of custome ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
