TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and not to Delhi Police rightly and being a sub-contractor they were liable to pay the service tax. - it is seen that major beneficiary of contractor or residential complex is the Delhi Police (Govt. of India) and M/s HPL is only the contractor executing agency who have provided the service to the Delhi Police through sub- contractor. They have further got the work done from the appellants who were connected as a sub-contractor. I find that intention of the Government is not to levy service tax on the service received by the Government of India through contractor or subcontractor. I have also examined the exemption. If sub-contractor is directed to pay the service tax which have ultimately to be utilizes by the Delhi Police (Govt. of India) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e being not taxable. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/56911/2013-ST(SM) - Final Order No. A/54936/2014-ST(SM) - Dated:- 29-9-2014 - Manmohan Singh,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri S K Sarwal For the Respondent : Shri B B Sharma, DR ORDER Per: Manmohan Singh: Appellant have come in appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 349/ST/DLH/2012 dated 13.12.2012 wherein their appeal was rejected and Order-in-Original No. 227/ST/SI/REFUND/2011 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Service Tax Division-I, New Delhi was upheld. Appellants contended that their appeal was rejected on the ground that M/s HPL was a contractor and they were a sub-contractor. They have signed agreement of work of contract with M/s HPL for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng services directly to the GOI for its personal use. Therefore, as for the instant arrangement between Ministry of Urban Development and NBCC was concerned, the service tax was not leviable. It may, however, be pointed that it the NBCC, being a party to a direct contract with GOI, engages a sub-contractor for carrying out the whole or part of the construction, then the sub-contractor would be liable to pay service tax as in that case, NBCC would be the service receiver and the construction would not be for the personal use. 3. Heard both the sides and perused the record. 4. I have gone through the submissions made by both the sides and find that the only issue involved for consideration whether sub-contractors engaged for building re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l use and will not come under the service leviable to service tax. In this regard definition of the service of commercial and industrial construction service became taxable as per the Section 65 (25b) in 2004. However, the definition and scope of service was changed by Finance Act, 2005 and revised definition is reproduced for appreciation (a) Construction of new building or a civil structure or a part thereof; or (b) Construction of pipeline or conduit; or (c) Completion and finishing services such as glazing, plastering, painting, floor and wall tiling, was covering and wall papering, wood and metal joinery and carpentry, fencing and railing, construction of swimming pools, acoustic applications or fittings and other similar serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommercial purposes further construction by Government for non-commercial purpose was not taxable, however construction by the Government for commercial activities such as civil body construction for shops or commercial complexes laying in the nature of commercial activity were taxable. 7. Viewing the above facts in totality, it is observed that merely because the construction has been get done from the contractor/sub-contractor, it will not change the nature or the activity from non-commercial to commercial. Once it comes out that Government has undertaken a project which is non-commercial in nature and not taxable, service received on this account by the Government would not come under the taxability. In above context, judgment quoted b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|