2014 (10) TMI 386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rastructure Pvt. Ltd. In the Misc. Order No.21369/2014 dt. 11/06/2014 in that case, this Tribunal after considering the meaning of airport, aerodrome, appertainment etc. came to the conclusion that building constructed for air cargo agency near the airport is excluded from the definition of works contract service. In this case also, we are unable to accept the stand taken by the Revenue that MLCP .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the service is classifiable under works contract service. Revenue has taken a view that MLCP facility cannot be sought to be included under passenger facility since the car parking facility is not used only by passengers but others also. Therefore the exclusive of services rendered in respect of airports from the definition of works contract service has been held to be inapplicable to the appellan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unsel this Tribunal had occasioned to consider the very same issue in the case of SEW Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. In the Misc. Order No.21369/2014 dt. 11/06/2014 in that case, this Tribunal after considering the meaning of airport, aerodrome, appertainment etc. came to the conclusion that building constructed for air cargo agency near the airport is excluded from the definition of works contract serv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X