9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccordingly it is to be ascertained whether the claim of the Appellant is correct or otherwise - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No.ST/85420/2016 - A/88339/2018 - Dated:- 26-10-2018 - DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. C.J. MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For Assessee: Shri D.H. Nadkarni, Advocate For Revenue: Shri M.K. Sarangi, Jt. Commissioner (A.R.) ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra 1. This appeal is filed against OIA No.20/ST/NGP-II/2015/C, dt.29.07.2015, passed by Commissioner of C.E. S.Tax (Appeals) Nagpur. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in providing taxable services unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect, roads, airports, railways transport terminals, bridges, etc. are excluded. A notification No.25/2012-ST, dt.20.06.2012 has been issued where under entry No.12(d) allowed exemption to the services provided to Government or any local authority by way of construction, erectioning, commissioning, installation etc of canal, dams, or other irrigation works. The learned Advocate has categorically claimed that the works shown in the Annexure A-1 to the Show Cause Notice which had been executed as sub contractor, related to construction of dam is used for hydro-electric projects etc. Referring to particular works contract enclosed with the Appeal, the learned Advocate mentioned that Maniyari project was for construction of barrage, AD Hydro H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned Advocate further submits that as far as the list of projects mentioned in the Annexure B to the Show Cause Notice is concerned, except for Vajra-SREPL, which was for supply of material and for service rendered to MSSIDC, Railway for construction of various Railway Foot Over bridges (FOB), Multi Urban Water Pipeline for supply of drinking water facility under Nagpur Municipal Corporation, remaining works undertaken are chargeable to service tax. He has contended that of total taxable value of ₹ 95,17,21,295/- received on executing the projects mentioned under Annexure B to the Show Cause Notice, of which the exempted value is approximately ₹ 59,94,69,001/- and the taxable value is ₹ 35,22,52,294/-. It is his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hence exempted from the works contract service. There are 14 projects listed in the Annexure B of which the Appellant do not dispute most of the same, but contest few projects as not taxable. Similarly, there are almost 30 different projects undertaken by the Appellant as detailed in Annexure C , which they also claim to be related to hydro-electric projects, irrigation projects, etc and consequently exempted from payment of duty. It is the contention of the Appellant that before the learned Commissioner they could not substantiate their claim by producing each and every work order/contract which related to construction of dams, irrigation projects, hydro-electric power projects etc and therefore they may be given an opportunity to expl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
