Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2016 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 353 - AT - Service TaxTaxable service erection of transmission towers Held that - Central Government of India by notification 45/2010-ST dated 20.07.2010 had issued a 11D notification holding that for the services rendered up to 21.06.2010 in relation to transmission of electricity and distribution of the same, service tax liability does not arise. The period involved is 2005-06 to 2007-08 decided against the Revenue.
Issues:
Service tax liability on services rendered for erection of towers for 132 KV Mul - Sindewahi line. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the Revenue against Order-in Appeal No. 418-419/NGP/2010 dated 26.11.2010. The issue involved pertained to the service tax liability on services provided by the respondent for the erection of towers for the 132 KV Mul - Sindewahi line. The matter was previously disposed of by the bench through a final order dated 30.03.2012, which was subsequently appealed by the Revenue before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. The High Court remanded the case back to re-examine the matter, specifically considering the benefit of notification no. 45/2010. Upon reviewing the records, it was established that the respondent was indeed providing services for the erection of transmission towers used in the transmission and distribution of electricity. Notably, the Central Government had issued notification 45/2010-ST dated 20.07.2010, which exempted service tax liability for services rendered up to 21.06.2010 concerning the transmission and distribution of electricity. The period under consideration in this case was 2005-06 to 2007-08. The first appellate authority had previously dismissed the proceedings on other grounds. However, given that the issue was now conclusively covered by the 11D notification in favor of the assessee, the impugned order was upheld, with any consequential relief granted to the respondent. The decision was pronounced in court, affirming the relief provided to the respondent based on the notification's applicability to the services rendered during the specified period.
|