Page 170 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

256 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 37
ing services such as glazing, plastering, floor and wall tilling, in-
stallation of electrical fittings of an immovable property, service
tax shall be payable on sixty per cent, of the total amount charged
for the works contract;”
In the light of above, the value of services provided in relation to the services of
painting & white washing are to be taxed @ 60%.

Period Amount and tax liability Amount and tax liability declared
worked out by the department by the declarant
Gross Taxable Tax liability Gross Taxable Tax liability
receipt amount receipt amount
2008-09 3901532 3901532 482230 0 0 0
2009-10 1104712 1104712 113785 0 0 0

The present investigation got initiated based on Income Tax data about taxable
amount for respective year as received on account of services relating to road,
tube well/bore well/submersible pump and private house, which are exempt.
It proves beyond doubt that the taxable value in FYs 2008-09 & 2009-10
was Zero.
Thus, for considering the admissibility of exemption for the FY 2010-11
the taxable turnover of FY 2009-10 was to be considered, which was ZERO.
Therefore, appellant was entitled for the exemption from payment of service tax
on the entire value of taxable turnover was Rs. 9,68,467/- in the FY 2010-11.
12. The requisite certificate is also on record, thus we are of the opinion
that the demand of Rs. 22,36,44/ has been confirmed without appreciating the
relevant documents and rather in self despite the adjudicating as is discussed
above. The adjudicating authority has also observed that the difference in Tax
liability is mostly on account of calculation by availing abatement, whereas it
was not admissible to them. The mistake of the Appellant for short declaration of
tax liability is rather held to be a bona fide mistake on the part of the Appellant.
The declaration is denied to be a false declaration. The confirmation of penalty
still, under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994, therefore, is held to be contradictory
to the said observations. Since the documents are on record to appreciate the
threshold limit as well as the entitlement of abatement as impressed upon by the
Appellant, we deem fit that the matter be remanded back to the adjudicating au-
thority for de novo adjudication of the entire demand, however, keeping in view
impugned adjudication, after due consideration of the documents on record, spe-
cifically, the certificate and other documents for the abatements as well w.r.t. as
the threshold limit of the preceding year. The issue of imposition of interest and
penalty be also decided afresh, however, subject to the above discussion.
13. As a result of entire above discussions the appeal in hand is hereby
allowed by way of remand.
(Operative part pronounced in the open Court)

_______

GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  170