9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant. - ST/75637/2017 - FO/75659/2018 - Dated:- 22-3-2018 - SHRI (DR.) SATISH CHANDRA, PRESIDENT AND SHRI C. J. MATHEW, TECHNICAL MEMBER Appearance: Shri Pulak Kr. Saha, CA for the Appellant (s) Shri S.S. Chattopadhayay, Suptd. (AR) for the Respondent (s) Per C.J.Mathew, 1. The appellant, M/s Nitson Amitsu Pvt Ltd, is a provider of construction services and, prior to 1st June 2007, had been discharging tax liability on composite contract after availing the abatement of 67% under notification no.18/2005-ST dated 7th June 2005 and notification no.01/2006- ST dated 1st March 2006. For the period after 1st June 2007, the appellant had been exercising the option of paying service tax at 2% under the Works C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of Hon ble Supreme Court Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Kerala v. Larsen Toubro Ltd [2015(39) STR 913 (SC)]. For the period after 1st June, 2007 it is the contention of Learned Chartered Accountant that there is no dispute on the coverage of taxability under section 65 (105)(zzzh) of Finance Act, 1994 and that the differential duty for the interim period was sought to be recovered merely on the ground of delay in intimation of option to exercise the discharge of duty liability under the composition scheme. 3. Learned Authorised Representatives submits that the remand order of the Tribunal was very clearly limited only to ascertainment of eligibility of benefit of abatement as provider of construction service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts, even though included in section 65(105) of Finance Act, 1994 prior to that date, would be taxable only if these were services simpliciter and not in composite contracts. 6. The decision has held that the intention of the legislature was to exclude such composite contract prior to the incorporation of works contract service in section 65(105) of Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, notwithstanding the limited scope of the remand by the Tribunal and in accordance with the law of the land as now prevailing, liability of tax on the activity of the appellant prior to the date of 1st June 2007 does not arise. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. (Pronounced in the Open Court on 22.03.2018) - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
