9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (8) TMI 1278 - AT - Service TaxExemption from service tax - construction of road for use by the general public - construction of railway siding - Demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs.7,68,021/- - GTA Service - Extended period of limitation. Exemption from service tax - construction of road for use by the general public - HELD THAT - The appellant has rendered service in relation to construction of road between NH2 and Aerotropolis Township for M/s. Bengal Aerotropolis Limited. The appellant has pointed out that this road has been certified by the Andal Gram Panchayat as a road meant for public use . It is observed that construction of road is exempted in terms of Sl. No. 13(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012 - it is clear that construction of road for use by the general public is exempted. The local authority, namely, Andal Gram Panchayat, has certified that the road constructed is meant for use by general public . Therefore, the demand confirmed in the impugned order on this count is not sustainable. Exemption from service tax - construction of railway siding - HELD THAT - The appellant has also rendered service to RITS in connection with the construction of railway siding. They had also rendered the service of supplying and laying of blanketing material for the project construction of railway, formation of major and minor bridges, laying of railway track including supply of p. way fittings, etc., in connection with new railway siding for Sonepur Bazari Project of Eastern Coalfields Limited, near Pandabeswar, West Bengal to M/s. Bridge Roof Company (India) Ltd. It is observed that the above said services were rendered by the appellant to the Railways. It is observed that the issue of liability of Service Tax on railway sidings is no more res integra as the same has already been decided in favour of the appellant by the Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai in the case of KONKAN RAILWAY CORPORATION LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST CENTRAL EXCISE 2023 (2) TMI 1175 - CESTAT MUMBAI holding that any service in relation to railway siding constructed and erected are not liable to Service Tax, which has been affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS KONKAN RAILWAY CORPORATION LTD. 2023 (8) TMI 128 - SC ORDER . The demand of Service Tax confirmed in the impugned order for the services rendered in connection with construction of railway sidings and the services rendered to M/s. Bridge Roof Company (India) Ltd. are not liable to Service Tax. Demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs.7,68,021/- - Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT - The said demand pertains to the period 2013-14. The impugned Show Cause Notice was issued on 19.12.2016 on the basis of the differential value of ITR, 26AS and S.T.-3 Returns. There is no finding in the impugned order that the appellant has suppressed any information from the Department. Thus, it is observed that suppression of facts with the intention to evade payment of tax has not been established in this case and hence, the extended period of limitation is not invokable. Accordingly, the demand of Rs.7,68,021/- confirmed in the impugned order for the period 2013-14 by invoking the extended period of limitation is not sustainable. GTA Service - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT - The suppression of facts with the intention to evade payment of tax on the part of the appellant has not been established in this case and therefore, the extended period of limitation is not invokable. Therefore, the demand confirmed under the category of GTA Service by invoking the extended period of limitation is not sustainable. Appeal disposed off.
Issues Involved:
1. Exemption of Service Tax on construction of road. 2. Exemption of Service Tax on construction of railway siding. 3. Demand of Service Tax for short-payment for the period 2013-14. 4. Demand of Service Tax under the category of 'GTA Service' on reverse charge mechanism. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Exemption of Service Tax on Construction of Road: The appellant argued that the construction of a road between NH2 and Aerotropolis Township, certified by the Andal Gram Panchayat as meant for 'public use', is exempt from Service Tax under Sl. No. 13(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012. The Tribunal observed that the construction of roads for public use is indeed exempted under the said notification. The relevant portion of the notification states: "Services provided by way of construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation, or alteration of a road, bridge, tunnel, or terminal for road transportation for use by general public." Therefore, the demand confirmed in the impugned order on this count was held to be unsustainable. 2. Exemption of Service Tax on Construction of Railway Siding: The appellant contended that the services rendered for the construction of railway siding and related activities were exempt under Sl. No. 14(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012. The Tribunal noted that the issue of Service Tax liability on railway sidings had been settled in favor of the appellant by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of C.G.S.T. and Central Excise v. Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. [2023 (385) E.L.T. 650 (S.C.)], which held that services related to railway sidings are not liable to Service Tax. The Tribunal also referenced its own decisions in similar cases, such as Hari Construction & Associates Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.G.S.T. & Excise, Patna-II, and Bridge & Roof Company (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.G.S.T. & Excise, Kolkata South. Consequently, the demand for Service Tax on services related to railway sidings and services rendered to M/s. Bridge & Roof Company (India) Ltd. was found to be unsustainable. 3. Demand of Service Tax for Short-payment for the Period 2013-14: The appellant argued that the demand of Rs.7,68,021/- for the period 2013-14, raised through a Show Cause Notice issued on 19.12.2016, was barred by limitation as there was no suppression of facts with the intention to evade tax. The Tribunal observed that the impugned order did not establish any suppression of information by the appellant. Therefore, the extended period of limitation was not applicable, and the demand was set aside on the ground of limitation. 4. Demand of Service Tax under the Category of 'GTA Service' on Reverse Charge Mechanism: The appellant contended that the demand of Rs.2,34,560/- under the category of 'GTA Service' was also raised by invoking the extended period of limitation without establishing suppression of facts with the intention to evade tax. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, noting that the extended period of limitation was not invokable in this case. Additionally, the appellant argued that the issue was revenue-neutral as they were entitled to take CENVAT Credit of the same amount on the same date of payment. Therefore, the demand under the category of GTA Service was set aside on the ground of limitation. Conclusion: The Tribunal passed the following orders: 1. The demand for Service Tax on the construction of road and railway siding, and services rendered to M/s. Bridge & Roof Company (India) Ltd., was set aside. 2. The demand of Rs.7,68,021/- for the period 2013-14 was set aside on the ground of limitation. 3. The demand of Rs.2,34,560/- under the category of 'GTA Service' on reverse charge mechanism was set aside on the ground of limitation. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
|
