9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 926X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x, New Delhi had no jurisdiction over the appellant and, therefore, the notice issued to the appellant in respect of the appellants operations in Rajasthan, where they were separately registered and filling returns, is without jurisdiction. Consequently, the demand on this issue cannot be upheld and is, therefore, set aside - since the demand itself has been set aside the issue of admissibility of input CENVAT credit on the strength of challans becomes irrelevant. Valuation of services - benefit of abatement - contract entered with GAIL Chainsa and VB Builders - appellant had paid VAT (value added tax) on more than 67 per cent of the total contract value and paid service tax on 33 per cent of the gross amount received in respect of such contracts - applicability of Rule 2 A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 - HELD THAT:- It is an admitted fact that appellant had not provided any evidence of VAT payment and consequently valuation was done by the impugned order in terms of Clause 2 (ii) of Rule 2 A of the Determination of Value Rules, 2006 - It has not been denied by the appellant that the contract entered with GAIL Chainsa and VB Builders was in the nature ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their operations in Rajasthan and Chandigarh to the respective service tax authorities in Rajasthan and Chandigarh. The appellant took centralised registration in New Delhi on 18.07.2008. The said centralised registration, learned counsel claimed, accidently and by mistake included the address of their offices at Rajasthan and Chandigarh. On realising the said mistake in the centralised registration, the appellant filed the amendment request which was accepted on 12.06.2013 and the address of Rajasthan and Chandigarh offices were deleted from the centralised registration in New Delhi. 4. Learned counsel pointed out that on the first issue the demand confirmed in the order pertains to their operation in Rajasthan. He argued that the show cause notice had been issued by the Principal Commissioner Service Tax, New Delhi on 24.04.2015. He pointed out that Principal Commissioner Service Tax New Delhi did not have any jurisdiction to raise the demand in respect of their operations in Rajasthan since they were independently registered there in Rajasthan and, therefore, show cause notice in respect of demand raised for their operations in Rajasthan is ab initio void for lack of jurisdic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of the value of the goods and paid service tax on the balance 33 per cent of the value of goods. The impugned order confirms a demand of service tax at the rate of 4.12 per cent in terms of Clause (ii) of Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 allowing abatement of 60 per cent and charging duty on 40 per cent of total amount charged. 6. Learned counsel pointed out that third issue involved relates to the projects in respect of which the impugned order claims that the appellant had not provided any works orders and learned counsel submitted that they have now submitted in Tribunal the necessary document to substantiate their claim regarding availment of claim under work contract service. 7. Learned counsel also argued that no penalty can be imposed as there is no short levy in this case. 8. Learned authorised representative relied on the impugned order. He further argued that as far as the first issue regarding jurisdiction is concerned, during the disputed period the appellant was registered in Rajasthan and Chandigarh as well as in Delhi. He argued that in view of above, the Principal Commissioner of Service Tax Delhi had jurisdiction to issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax, New Delhi had no jurisdiction over the appellant and, therefore, the notice issued to the appellant in respect of the appellants operations in Rajasthan, where they were separately registered and filling returns, is without jurisdiction. Consequently, the demand on the first issue cannot be upheld and is, therefore, set aside. 13. In respect of first issue since the demand itself has been set aside the issue of admissibility of input CENVAT credit on the strength of challans becomes irrelevant. 14. As regards second issue, it is an admitted fact that appellant had not provided any evidence of VAT payment and consequently valuation was done by the impugned order in terms of Clause 2 (ii) of Rule 2 A of the Determination of Value Rules, 2006. Rule 2A reads as under:- 2A. Determination of value of service portion in the execution of a works contract. - Subject to the provisions of section 67, the value of service portion in the execution of a works contract , referred to in clause (h) of section 66E of the Act, shall be determined in the following manner, namely:- (i) Value of service portion in the execution of a works contract shall be equivalent to the gross amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion and finishing services such as glazing or plastering or floor and wall tiling or installation of electrical fittings of immovable property, service tax shall be payable on seventy percent of the total amount charged for the works contract; (C) in case of other works contracts, not covered under sub-clauses (A) and (B), including maintenance, repair, completion and finishing services such as glazing, plastering, floor and wall tiling, installation of electrical fittings of an immovable property , service tax shall be payable on sixty per cent. of the total amount charged for the works contract; Explanation 1. - For the purposes of this rule,- (a) original works means- (i) all new constructions; (ii) all types of additions and alterations to abandoned or damaged structures on land that are required to make them workable; (iii) erection, commissioning or installation of plant, machinery or equipment or structures, whether pre-fabricated or otherwise; (b) total amount means the sum total of the gross amount charged for the works contract and the fair market value of all goods and services supplied in or in relation to the execution of the works contra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
