2015 (7) TMI 796 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - Composite services - Construction service and site formation service - held that - Adjudicating authority has confirmed service tax demand of ₹ 6,41,198/- under Site formation and clearance, Excavation and Earthmoving and Demolition Services . It cannot be called as a composite service. Present case it relates to construction of site formation in commercial buildings. Therefore, prima facie, the appellants have not made out a strong case for waiver of predeposit of entire dues - Partial stay granted.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Classification of services under Service Tax - Whether site formation work constitutes a composite service under construction activities for availing abatement.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in construction activities, filed a miscellaneous application seeking waiver of predeposit of dues arising from the impugned order. The appellant argued that they are registered with the Service Tax Department for construction activities and regularly discharge service tax after availing abatement. They contended that the site formation work, which forms only 5% of the total contract value, is incidental and not the primary service provided. The appellant relied on various decisions to support their claim that the essential service is construction under a composite contract. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order, stating that the specific classification of services precludes them from being classified as composite services.

Upon hearing both parties, the Tribunal observed that the adjudicating authority had confirmed a service tax demand for site formation and related services, which was not considered a composite service under construction activities. The Tribunal distinguished the decisions cited by the appellant, noting that they pertained to different contexts such as telecommunication tower construction and mining activities, unlike the present case involving site formation in commercial buildings. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the appellant had not established a strong case for the waiver of predeposit of entire dues. As a result, the appellant was directed to predeposit a specified amount within a set timeframe, with the balance dues' predeposit being waived upon compliance. The recovery of the remaining dues was stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment focused on the classification of services under Service Tax, specifically addressing whether site formation work could be considered a composite service within the realm of construction activities for availing abatement. The decision emphasized the importance of the specific nature of services provided and their classification criteria in determining the applicability of abatement and waiver of predeposit in such cases.