Consult Us For Construction
Service Tax on Consulting Engineering Services
Service Tax – Construction Service - civil engineering construction - applicability of service tax for Consulting Engineering Service - Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 - show cause-cum-Demand Notice invoking extended period of limitation - maintainability of the Writ Petition - Suppression of fact – validity of show cause notice
- HELD - there was full and sufficient disclosure of the nature of the Petitioner's business to the Department and it cannot be said that the Petitioner suppressed - Once the information is supplied pursuant to the directions of the revenue authority and information so supplied has not been questioned, a belated demand has to be held to be barred by limitation - mere failure to disclose a transaction and pay tax thereon or a mere misstatement or mere contravention of the Central Excise Act or the Finance Act, 1994 or of any Rules framed there under, is not sufficient for invocation of the extended period of limitation - the impugned show cause notice is hopelessly barred by limitation - Issue on merit
- Two show cause notices could not have been issued in relation to the same period. The impugned show cause notice, cannot be sustained - it appears that the respondents have already formed an opinion as regards the liability of the petitioner and hence, the impugned notice does not remain in the realm of a show cause notice - Service contracts simpliciter and not composite works contracts come within the service tax net under the provisions of the Finance Act.
- The petitioner is involved in performance of composite works contracts and vivisection of such contracts to segregate the service element and impose service tax on the same is not permissible – assessee petition succeeds