9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2001X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... L No. ST/681/11-Mum - Final Order No. A/3237/2015-WZB/STB - Dated:- 16-9-2015 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) For the Petitioner : Shri G.L. Des pande, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R.K. Das, Deputy Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is filed against Order-in-Original No. 17/ST/2011-12/C dated 28/10/2011. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the service tax liability of the appellant under the category of Commercial or Industrial Construction Services. The appellant is undertaking the activity of laying of Optical Fiber Cables for various telecom service providers. It is the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee and imposed penalty on them. The demand of tax was for the period 2003-08 and on the ground that the assessee had provided Erection, Commissioning or Installation services to Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL) without paying Service Tax thereon. In the appeal filed against the original authority's order, the assessee also filed an application for waiver of pre-deposit of the adjudged dues. The appellate authority disposed of this application by an order directing the assessee to pre-deposit the entire amount of Service Tax, which was not deposited. After expiry of the time granted for pre-deposit, the appellate authority dismissed the assessee's appeal on the aforesaid ground. 3. After examining the records and hearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for crossing of wires, fixing junction box, MS box, wooden box, fixing cable trays to lay cables, digging earth to lay the cables and digging earth pits for earthing of equipments did not amount to installation of plant, commissioning of machinery/ equipments etc. We have heard learned SDR also, who has made a feeble attempt to distinguish the cited case of Rajeev Electrical Works (supra) and also the case examined by the Board in the cited Circular. 5. We have found prima facie case for the appellant in view of the cited Circular and decision. Hence, the appellant need not be asked to make any pre-deposit. Of course, we are not unmindful to the fact that neither the Circular nor the decision was before the learned Additional Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
