2015 (6) TMI 229

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in this case, water supply was made by the Government or Municipality to the citizens and therefore, it cannot be said on prima facie basis that ‘works contract' was in relation to commercial or industrial purpose. Therefore, substantial portion of demand gets excluded for the purpose of requirement of pre-deposit. It is also seen that another demand of more than 52 lakhs is for laying of pipelin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d penalties under Section 76, 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 had also been confirmed against the appellants. 2. After hearing both sides and on going through the records, we find that the services provided to various customers which are in the nature of laying of pipelines for water supply may not be leviable to service tax under works contract service' in view of the fact that in this case, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h Government at Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam. The various components of work in terms of the agreement included construction of pumping of main valve including lowering, laying jointing, testing etc. of pipelines from infiltration wells to sump, construction of control room, construction of sump, construction of pump house etc. These are the works done by the appellant at Bobbili also. In ou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X