9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lief sought in this application. 2. Proceedings were initiated by a show-cause notice dated 8-4-2011 proposing service tax demand of Rs. 2,76,01,960/- besides interest and penalties, for having provided works contract service during October 2009 to September 2010. After due process, the impugned order confirmed the demand to the extent of Rs. 1,05,56,578/-; dropped the demand to the extent of Rs. 1,70,45,382/- for the period November 2009 to 30-9-2010 and confirmed the liability to corresponding interest and stipulated penalties. The assessed service tax liability comprises, inter alia, a tax demand of Rs. 85,47,332/- covered by consideration received after 24-10-2009 but in respect of works contract services provided during July 2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mills Company, the Supreme Court negated the claim of the assessee for immunity to excise duty levied on goods manufactured earlier, during currency of an exemption Notification but removed after lifting of the exemption, on the ground that Rule 9A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 authorises levy of duty at the time of removal of the goods from the factory premises. Though reliance is placed on the reasoning in this judgment, we are not persuaded on the application of the ratio of this judgment to the facts and circumstances of this case. Prior to 23-10-2009, the rendition of works contract service in relation to canals, irrespective of whether the canal works were for the purpose of commerce or industry or otherwise was exigible to servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 41/2009-S.T. The learned counsel for the petitioner rightly relies on the principles discernible from the interim order dated 1-10-2013 in stay application ST/Stay/2429/2012 in appeal ST/3348/2012 and in stay application ST/Stay/25449/2013 in appeal ST/25369/2013, passed by the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal wherein it was clearly and with respect rightly, held that works contract works undertaken in relation to canals would include pump houses and other facilities erected for lifting the water from lower to higher level of the canals, as would be the case in lift irrigation projects. For reasons alike as recorded in the interim order of this Tribunal dated 1-10-2013 (referred to supra), we find a strong prima facie case in favour of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
