Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesNon-Registration Under Service Tax; Real Estate Contractor Faces Rs. 31 Lakh Penalty:...

Non-Registration Under Service Tax; Real Estate Contractor Faces Rs. 31 Lakh Penalty: CESTAT

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has upheld the penalty of Rs. 31 lakh penalty on real estate contractors for non-registration under service tax in labour supply to builders.

The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that the appellant/contractor had received Rs. 3,02,90,638 during the period 2009-2012 and no satisfactory explanation was offered by the appellant. 

The appellants was engaged in providing “Construction of Residential Complex service services to various builders and developers, Jodhpur. Intelligence was received that the appellant was not paying service tax on the taxable services provided by them. 

During the course of investigations, itendra Panwar appeared before the Superintendent(AE), Central Excise Division, Jodhpur and stated that there company has been operating since 2011 and undertaking the work on Labour Rate contract basis. He stated that they had worked for M/s Manav Developers only and submitted a copy of the agreement. 

On completion of investigations, the department issued Show Cause dated 14.10.2014 demanding service tax of Rs.31,19,937 under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest under section 75 and proposing penalty under Section 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 

The Assistant Commissioner decided the matter ex-parte and issued the Order confirming demand of Rs.31,19,937 along with interest under Section 75 and penalty under section 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) also passed the order. The appeal has been filed.

The tribunal noted that the department had examined the agreement between the appellant and M/s Manav Builders and arrived at the conclusion that the appellant had not provided material along with the labour service. This is substantiated by the Nil VAT returns filed by the appellant. Consequently, the appellant was not eligible to any abatement from the gross amount received for the services rendered by them. 

The tribunal held that no evidence has been produced in support of the appellant’s contention.

Case Details

Case Title: M/s Panwar Builders Versus Commissioner of Central Goods, Service Tax, Central Excise, Udaipur

Case No.: Service Tax Appeal No. 53503 Of 2018

Date: 16.05.2025

Counsel For Appellant: None

Counsel For Respondent: Anand Narayan

Read More: 18% GST On Cooperative Societies if Turnover Exceeds Rs. 20 Lakh: Report

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Gifts And Incentives To Doctors: Stronger Checks Needed On Unethical Pharma Marketing: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to constitute a committee within two weeks...

Criminal Breach Of Trust Can’t Be Proved Without Evidence Of Entrustment And Dishonest Intent: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has restored the acquittal of a former Telephone Department cashier accused...

Investors Not Named in Trust Deed: Supreme Court Rejects CBDT Appeal Against Tax Relief 

The Supreme Court has dismissed the Central Board of Direct Taxes’ (CBDT) challenge to...

India’s $112 Billion Trade Gap With China Exposes Manufacturing Dependence

India’s success in reducing toy imports has shown how targeted customs duties and quality...

More like this

Gifts And Incentives To Doctors: Stronger Checks Needed On Unethical Pharma Marketing: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to constitute a committee within two weeks...

Criminal Breach Of Trust Can’t Be Proved Without Evidence Of Entrustment And Dishonest Intent: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has restored the acquittal of a former Telephone Department cashier accused...

Investors Not Named in Trust Deed: Supreme Court Rejects CBDT Appeal Against Tax Relief 

The Supreme Court has dismissed the Central Board of Direct Taxes’ (CBDT) challenge to...