9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing or Installation Service". The rest of the demand is under other heads. An amount of Rs.10,27,548/- paid by the appellant stands appropriated towards the above demand of Service Tax. The work undertaken by the appellant is covered by a series of purchase orders available on record, each indicating that the scope of the work was to supply civil materials for foundation works at the client's sites. Learned Commissioner who adjudicated the relevant show-cause notice took the view that the earthworks, excavation, road formation, etc., carried out by the appellant under the above contracts were in relation to "erection, commissioning or installation" of windmills. Therefore, according to the adjudicating authority, the works undertaken by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ponents viz., sale of materials, road formation, unloading charges, capacity transfer, hire charges, transportation, construction of foundation for tower, residential house, compensation and liaisoning charges in one category. In the second category, the synopsis indicates four components, viz., excavation, pit excavation, platform excavation and others. In the first category, the total value comes to Rs.10,88,03,838/- and in the second category, the total value comes to Rs.2,24,97,086/-. The gross value (sum of the above two) is shown to be Rs.13,13,00,924/-. In any case, according to the learned consultant, there can be no levy of Service Tax on the total amount in the first category. He has made an endeavour to elaborate this. In this co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the findings recorded by the learned Commissioner. His emphasis is on the definition of the service in question. It is argued that, admittedly, all the works undertaken by the appellant were preparatory to erection, commissioning and installation of windmills and hence all of them to have been carried out in relation to erection, commissioning or installation service. 5. In his rejoinder, the learned consultant has also pleaded financial hardships in support of waiver of pre-deposit. Further, in answer to queries from the Bench, the learned consultant has fairly submitted that, for the limited purpose of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, the appellant can, at most, pre-deposit a further amount of Rs.25,00,000/- over and above the Serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
