9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 702 - AT - Service TaxConstruction service - Notification No. 45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 - Held that - Appellant rendered service to facilitate erection of electricity of transmission tower. It is seen from the bills annexed in the Memorandum of Appeal that the appellant rendered service of setting concreting, earthing erection of towers and stringing of conductor earth wires. - As per the Notification 45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 the service tax was not required to be paid in respect of taxable service relating to transmission and distribution of electricity tower during the aforesaid period. We agree with the submission of the learned AR that the amount deposited by the appellant, which has been appropriated in the adjudication order would not be refunded. In any event, there is no dispute that the appellant rendered the service relating to transmission and distribution of the electricity tower during the said period and therefore the demand of tax is not sustainable in terms of the Notification dated 20.7.2010 - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Common issue involved in three appeals - Exemption under Notification No. 45/2010-ST - Service tax liability for construction service relating to electricity transmission tower. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, delivered by Shri P.K. Das, addressed the common issue in three appeals regarding the exemption under Notification No. 45/2010-ST and the service tax liability for construction services related to electricity transmission towers. The appeals were heard together and decided after considering the stay applications. The appellant had provided construction services to facilitate the erection of electricity transmission towers for the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The appellant claimed exemption under Notification No. 45/2010-ST, which exempted taxable services related to transmission and distribution of electricity for a specified period. The appellant argued that the services provided fell within the exemption period mentioned in the notification. However, the Revenue contended that the appellant did not claim the benefit of the notification before the lower authorities or the Tribunal, and thus, the benefit should not be extended at that stage. The Revenue also highlighted that the appellant had admitted the tax liability and partially paid the service tax. Upon reviewing the records and the impugned order, the Tribunal found that the appellant had indeed rendered services related to the transmission and distribution of electricity towers, as evidenced by the bills provided. The Tribunal examined the relevant portion of Notification No. 20.7.2010, which stated that service tax was not required to be paid for taxable services related to transmission and distribution of electricity during the specified period. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's argument that the amount already deposited by the appellant, which was appropriated in the adjudication order, would not be refunded. However, considering that the appellant's services fell within the scope of the exemption provided in the notification, the Tribunal held that the demand for tax was not sustainable. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with this observation. The stay applications were also disposed of as part of the judgment. In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the services provided for the construction of electricity transmission towers were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 45/2010-ST. The judgment emphasized the importance of timely claiming such exemptions and upheld the appellant's position based on the provisions of the notification and the nature of the services rendered during the specified period.
|
