2026-VIL-20-CESTAT-KOL-ST
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-20-CESTAT-KOL-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax – Works Contract, Determination of Value – Providing of services related to fabrication and installation of aluminium architectural systems - Appellant paid Service Tax under the category ‘Commercial or Industrial Construction Service’, on 33% of the total amount charged, after availing abatement, in terms of Notification No. 1/2006-ST, dated 01-03-2006; and service tax under Works Contract (Composition Scheme for Payment of Service Tax) @4%, as per Notification No. 32/2007 -ST, dated 22-05-2007 - Whether the appellant is eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 1/2006-ST, dated 01-03-2006, and Notification No. 32/2007-ST, dated 22-05-2007 – HELD - As per the conditions of Notification No. 1/2006-ST, dated 01-03-2006, the appellant was not entitled to avail CENVAT Credit on the 'inputs'. The appellant is not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 1/2006-ST, dated 01-03-2006, as they had availed CENVAT Credit on inputs and input services, which was not permitted under the said notification. However, the appellant is eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 32/2007-ST, dated 22-05-2007, as the substantial benefit of the exemption cannot be denied on the ground of procedural infirmities, such as non-exercise of the option to avail the composition scheme - After denying the benefits of the Notification Nos. 1/2006-ST, dated 01-03-2006 and 32/2007-ST, dated 22-05-2007, Service Tax has been demanded by adding the value of goods in the ‘gross amount charged’. It is pertinent to note that if the concessional rate of 4% as provided under Notification No. 32/2007-ST, dated 22-05-2007 is not extended, then the value of service needs to be determined in terms of Rule 2A(i) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 by excluding the value of the goods and VAT/WCT from the gross amount charged. However, the Department has demanded Service Tax by including the value of the goods used in execution of the ‘works contract’, which is legally not sustainable - The value of services needs to be determined in terms of Rule 2A(i) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, by excluding the value of the goods and VAT/WCT from the gross amount charged. The matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority to recompute the Service Tax liability in accordance with this principle - The demand of Service Tax confirmed in the impugned order beyond the normal period of limitation, is barred by limitation - The appeal is disposed of by way of remand, directing the adjudicating authority to recompute the Service Tax liability. No penalty is imposable on the demand of Service Tax, if any, confirmed for the normal period of limitation - The appeal is partly allowed by remand
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C of FY24-25
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?