2017 (9) TMI 2037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ontract Services' without providing abatement - as submitted that even in Works Contract , no benefit of abatement under Notification No. 15/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004 was provided to the assessee-Appellants. Similarly, the benefit of ratio laid down in the case of CCE, Kerala vs Larsen Toubro Ltd [ 2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT] was not provided to the assessee. HELD THAT:- When it is so, th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is October 2004 to March 2009. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, during the period under consideration, the assessee-Appellants were engaged in the construction activities. The assessee-Appellants claimed that their service falls under the category of Commercial Industrial Services and they were paying the Service Tax. However, the Department opined that it falls under the Works Contract S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bmits that the amount received by the assessee-Appellants is the subject matter of the Service Tax, but in the instant case, the amount was taken on the basis of the balance sheet and not on receipt basis. 5. When it is so, then we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue de novo on merit, but by providing a reasonable oppo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X