9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 917 - AT - Service TaxLevy of Service tax - activity of construction of railway infrastructure i.e., tracks - benefit of exemption under Notification No. 17/2005-S.T. dated 07.06.2005 and Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012 - HELD THAT - The said issue has been examined by this Tribunal in the case of M/S HARI CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST EXCISE, PATNA II 2023 (9) TMI 454 - CESTAT KOLKATA wherein it has been observed The taxable service in Finance Act, 1994 excluding railways from the ambit of the service did not place any restriction on benefit going to private railways. The statute, 10 ST/86191/2021 too, did not consider it necessary to fall back on the definition of railways in another statute for determination of taxability and it is not open to the adjudicating authority to arrogate that privilege in an executive capacity. The intent of exclusion prior to 1st July 2012, and exemption for the period, thereafter, is abundantly clear. The issue has already been settled by this Tribunal and it has been categorically held that there is no distinction between public railways and private railways. In these circumstances, following the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Hari Construction Associates Pvt. Ltd., it is held that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of exemption vide Notification No. 17/2005-S.T. dated 07.06.2005 and Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012, as claimed. Accordingly, no demand of Service Tax is sustainable against the appellant. The impugned order set aside - appeal allowed.
Issues:
The judgment involves the confirmation of demand of Service Tax against the appellant under the category of "works contract service" for construction of railway infrastructure. Summary: The appellant, engaged in providing works contract service for construction of railway infrastructure, was contesting the demand of Service Tax based on exemptions under Notification No. 17/2005-S.T. and Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. The dispute arose as the railways in question were constructed for exclusive use by a specific corporation, not for public carriage. The key issue was whether the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax or entitled to exemption under the mentioned notifications. The Tribunal referred to a previous case and observed that there is no distinction between public and private railways for the purpose of exemption. It was held that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the exemptions under Notification No. 17/2005-S.T. and Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. The impugned order confirming the demand of Service Tax was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the exemptions claimed, and no demand of Service Tax is sustainable against them. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
|
