2025-VIL-1022-CESTAT-DEL-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax – Sections 68 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 – Construction of residential complex – Appellant/sub-contractor was engaged in providing construction of residential complex services, but had failed to pay service tax on payments received from main contractor – Department issued show cause notice proposing demand of Service Tax on payments received by Appellant for services provided to main contractor – The adjudicating authority dropped demand proposed in SCN. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside order-in-original and upheld demand along with equal penalty under Section 78 of the Act – Whether Appellant is liable to pay service tax on payments received for services provided to main contractor – HELD – It is an admitted fact that Appellant was a sub-contractor. The Section 68 of the Act provides that every person, which would include a sub-contractor, providing taxable service to any person shall pay Service Tax at rate specified. In absence of any exemption granted, sub-contractor has to discharge tax liability – Post 1.7. 2012, the services provided by Sub-contractor was exempted only if the services provided by the main contractor were exempted. If main contractor was liable to Service Tax, sub-contractor was also liable to Service Tax. In the instant case, the construction of residential complexes was not exempt from service tax duty. Hence, the sub-contractors, viz. appellants were liable to discharge their service tax liability on such services provided by them to the main contractor - Appellant/sub-contractor is liable to discharge service tax liability on services provided by them to main contractor – There is no infirmity in impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) and hence, said order is upheld – The appeals are dismissed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page