9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant for various customers. The impugned order confirmed the said demand. In addition, payment of interest as well as penalties under various Sections of the Finance Act, 1994 was ordered. The period in dispute is from 2006-07 to 2010-11. The order for payment of Service Tax has been made under the categories of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service , 'Construction of Complex Service as well as 'Works Contract Service (WCS). The Adjudicating Authority has also denied the benefit of abatement in respect of all the above services. In respect of 'Works Contract Services , the benefit of Composition Scheme has not been extended to the appellant. Aggrieved by the impugned order present appeal has been filed. 3. With the above backgroun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made contract specific submissions as follows:- a. Many contracts have been executed for APMC. The Tribunal has held in the case of Sanjeev K. Gaddamwar V/s Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Reported in 2017 (5) GSTL 206 (Tri-Mumbai) and other cases that no Service tax can be levied on the Construction work for APMC. b. The appellant has carried out construction work for Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation as well s Rajasthan State Seeds Corporation Ltd. towards construction of godown, road, drain etc. In this connection, he relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case A.B. Projects Pvt. Ltd. V/s Commissioner 2017 (5) GSTL 195 (Tri- Mumbai) where Service Tax demand was set aside. c. The appellant has undertaken construc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... included in the statue under Section 65 (105) (zzzza) w.e.f. 01/06/2007. In the wake of authoritative pronouncement by the Apex Court in the case of L&T Ltd. (supra), no Service Tax can be levied for the period up to 31/05/2007. Consequently, we set aside the demand of Service Tax up to 31/05/2007 in respect of all the civil contracts executed by the appellant. 7. We note that the various contracts executed by the appellant have been classified under 'Commercial or Industrial Service , 'Construction of Complex Service or under 'Works Contract Service (WCS). In the light of the L&T case, all such contracts are liable to be classified only under the category of 'Works Contract Service and liability for Service Tax arises only w.e.f. 01/06/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... racts has been a subject matter of large number of litigation and clarifications by the Board. In such a situation, alleging fraud, collusion and willful misstatement on the part of the appellants is not tenable. It is seen that with the introduction "Works Contract Service" as a separate tax entry w.e.f. 01/06/2007, though the tax liability on works contract was specified by name, even thereafter the dispute continued about vivisecting the contract for valuing tax purpose. The matter was referred to five Member Larger Bench in the Tribunal in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd (supra). and the decision was also put to test before the Hon'ble Supreme Court resulting in the final order, stated above. In such circumstances, we find invoking exte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
