9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided partly in favour of assessee. - APPEAL NO: ST/544/2011 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2015 - Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) For the Petitioner : Shri V.B Gaikwad, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri S.R. Nair, E.O. (AR) ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran: This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: P-II/VSGRAO/49/2011 dated 23/06/2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune II. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the service tax liability on the services rendered by the appellant for construction of residential complexes and commercial or industrial constructions during the period 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to composite works contracts. This is clear from the very language of Section 65(105) defines taxable service as any service provided . All the services referred to in the said sub-clauses are service contracts simpliciter without any other element in them, such as for example, a service contract which is a commissioning and installation, or erection, commissioning and installation contract. Further, under Section 67, as has been pointed out above, the value of a taxable service is the gross amount charged by the service provider for such service rendered by him. This would unmistakably show that what is referred to in the charging provision is the taxation of service contracts simpliciter and not composite works contracts, such as are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and we do so. 5. At this juncture, the learned Departmental Representative submits that the appellant herein has received few payments from their service recipients after 01/06/2007. It is unclear as to whether those were in respect of works contract executed prior to 01/06/2007 or for the execution of the same works contract post 01/06/2007 while the learned counsel submits that the payments received post 01/06/2007 were in respect of those work contracts which were executed before 01/06/2007. In the absence of anything on record, we find that, for this limited purpose, as to ascertaining whether the payments received after 01/06/2007 is in respect of continuing work contract or completed work contract, we remand the matter to the adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
