9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arious other embankment work which includes supply of material. It is seen from agreement that Respondent has agreed to supply materials like pipes, concreting items like cement, coarse aggregates, fine aggregates, etc. The respondent/assessee and M/s RIL has considered this as a works contract and RIL has deducted an amount as TDS towards VAT on composition scheme as required under APVAT Act, 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es that the issue is regarding taxability of the amount received as consideration by the respondent herein, during the period 16.06.2005 to 31.03.2007 in respect of construction of various activities undertaken by the respondent at a site of M/s Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL). By a contract, the respondent herein entered into an agreement for construction of embankment for approach roads and periph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ention that the activity undertaken by them would fall under the category of construction of transport terminals and is exempted by Notification No. 17/2005-ST. 3. Revenue authorities are aggrieved by such order. It is the submission of the learned departmental representative that the findings of the first appellate authority that, this is nothing but construction of transport terminals, is i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proach roads for which materials were procured by the assessee. He submits that during the relevant period the respondent/assessee had paid VAT to the Government of Andhra Pradesh under the provisions of AP VAT considering the contract as a works contract. It is his submission that now the law is settled inasmuch, the contract if it contains supply and service portion would be a works contract and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cate produced by the respondent s counsel indicates so. In our view, since the contract entered by the respondent with RIL indicates it as works contract, the question of charging service tax on the amount received as and fall under site formation services would not arise as has been decided by an Apex Court in the case of Larsen Toubro Ltd (supra). 6. In view of the foregoing, we hold that a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
