2014 (12) TMI 546

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Applicant that the third show cause notice would be barred by limitation in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nizam Sugar’s case [2006 (4) TMI 127 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. However, regarding the demand relating to ‘Site Formation Services’, we are not convinced that the demand on such services, raised in the third show cause notice for the first time, after necessary investigation by the department, would also be barred by limitation. Prima facie, we are of the view that the services rendered by the Applicant to M/s. Reliance Telecommunication Ltd. are ‘Site Formation Services’. In these circumstances, the Applicant though could able to make out a prima facie case in their favour for total waiver of the dues agains .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on 11.07.2011 for the period, 2009 to 2010. He also submits that in view of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory vs. CCE, AP, 2006(197)ELT 465(SC), the second and the third show cause notices are barred by limitation. 3. Per contra, ld. AR for the Revenue submits that in all the show cause notices, the demand was raised for the services, namely, Manpower Recruitment Agency and Security Services , whereas, in the third show cause notice, besides the above services, the demand had been raised on Site Formation Services also. He further submits that rendering the services on account of Site Formation , had come to the notice of the Department for the first time in the year, 2011, and it has been .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ld also be barred by limitation. The ld. Advocate for the Applicant disputed about the leviability of service tax on such services. It is his submission that the Applicant only rendered the services of filling the soil for erection of the Communication Towers by their customers, which in any case, cannot be called as Site Formation Service . The ld.AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, countered the said argument and submitted that ld. Commissioner has categorically made a finding at para 15 of the impugned Order that such services rendered by the Applicant to M/s. Reliable Telecommunication, would fall under the category of Site Formation Service . Prima facie, we are of the view that the services rendered by the Applicant to M/s. Relia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X