Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (10) TMI 1854

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rm railways does not include services provided i.r.o roads, airports, railways, transport terminals, bridges, tunnels and dams; thus not liable to service tax. Painting of bus stand gets excluded from service tax as it gets covered under transport terminals excluded from the scope of service tax. Painting of plant and machinery of NTPS is an activity covered under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service under Section 65(25b) but they charged for electricity generated so as to able to provide electricity to public on self-sustaining basis; thus activity cannot be called commercial and service tax is not payable on the same. Laying of sewage pipe does not get covered in the activity of drain laying as both are not synonymous th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o them by the Nashik Municipal Corporation. Demand of duty on the services provided was confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the residential quarters of NTPS do not come under the category of Construction of Complex Service under Section 65(30a). Regarding painting of properties belonging to railways it was argued that Commercial or Industrial Construction Services excludes services provided in respect of railways under Section 65(25b). Similarly painting services provided to State Transport Bus Stand is excluded from Section 65(25b). Further, the painting of plant and machinery of NTPS is not an activity on a structur .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ee with the learned counsel that Completion and Finishing Service such as painting are covered under the service of Construction of Complex defined in Section 65(30a). The definition of this service, under Clause b , includes completion and finishing services in relation to residential complex . Residential complex defined under Section 65(91a) exclude buildings which are intended for personal use as residence and residence constructed by a person directly engaging any other person and the construction of such complex is entitled for personal use as residence by such person. We find that NTPS have constructed residential quarters for their own purpose i.e. for their own employees. Therefore, this activity is clearly outside the scope of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nment buildings or civil constructions are used for residential, office purposes or for providing civic amenities . The Board s circular mentions some Govt. constructions by way of illustration only and is not restrictive. The NTPS may not be doing charity work but at the same time they have to charge for electricity generated so as to able to provide electricity to the public on self-sustaining basis. Therefore, the activity cannot be called commercial in the strict sense of the term. Therefore, we are of the view that service tax is not payable on the painting of NTPS plant. 6.5 Regarding the last activity on which demand has been confirmed i.e. service of laying underground sewerage pipeline, the appellant have relied on Board s Circu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... drain pipeline which is covered under the category of erection, installation and commissioning service. From the facts on record we find that, admittedly, the activity undertaken is laying of sewerage pipeline. Whether this would get covered under the term drain laying is itself debatable. Strictly speaking, the words pipeline and drain are not synonymous. Therefore, benefit must go to the appellant. That laying of pipeline is not a taxable service is held by the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner v. Surindra Engineering Co. Ltd. - 2014-TIOL-2007-CESTAT-Mumbai = 2014 (36) S.T.R. 1191 (Tri.-Mum.). Even otherwise we find that the appellant has merit in their contention that they were not put to notice for changing the classification fr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates