9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction activity and supply of material, thus, making the contracts as composite contract. This issue has been settled by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of CCE vs. Larsen Toubro Ltd [ 2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT] , wherein it has been categorically held by the Hon ble Apex Court that composite contracts were not taxable under Service Tax prior to 01.06.2007. Demand of service tax under Rent-a-cab service - HELD THAT:- The decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rahul Travels vs. CCE, Nagpur [ 2016 (11) TMI 1294 - CESTAT MUMBAI] is squarely applicable in the present case and the appellant is not liable to pay service tax under Rent-a-cab Service or under Tour Operator Service because the same was not taxable prior to 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice to the appellant on 03.04.2008 alleging that the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax amounting to Rs.6,86,100/- under Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1994 by invoking the extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest under Section 75 of the Act and penalties under Sections 76, 77 78 of the Act were also proposed in the show cause notice. 2.2 As per the appellant the show cause notice was never served upon the appellant and the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand by passing an ex-parte order on 09.01.2009. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who has given the benefit of abatement of 67% under Notification No. 1/2006 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of 67% under Notification No. 1/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006 and ordered that the value of taxable service shall be limited to 33% of the gross amount charged. He further submits that finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) giving the abatement of 67%, has not been challenged by the department which clearly shows that the services rendered by the appellant were composite in nature involving service as well as material. 4.4 The learned Counsel further submits that the issue regarding taxability of composite contract prior to 01.06.2007 has been decided by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of CCE vs. Larsen Toubro Ltd (supra), wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has held that composite contracts were not taxable under Service Tax prior to 01.06.200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at this issue has been settled by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of CCE vs. Larsen Toubro Ltd (supra), wherein it has been categorically held by the Hon ble Apex Court that composite contracts were not taxable under Service Tax prior to 01.06.2007. 8. Further, as regards the issue of demand of service tax under Rent-a-cab service is concerned, we find that the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rahul Travels vs. CCE, Nagpur (supra) is squarely applicable in the present case and the appellant is not liable to pay service tax under Rent-a-cab Service or under Tour Operator Service because the same was not taxable prior to 01.06.2007. 9. Further, we find that the entire demand in the present case is barred by limitatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
