9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revenue which is in respect of finding by Original Authority and the same has been adjudicated by learned Commissioner (Appeals) and since the finding of learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not been challenged on the basis of any infirmity in the same the other ground also does not sustain. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent Authorised Representative for the Appellant Shri Nishant Mishra Shri Nitin Chopra, Advocates for the Respondent ORDER PER: ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR Above stated two appeals filed by revenue are arising out of common impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 233-235-ST/APPL/LKO/2018 dated 28/03/2018 passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x under work contracts service . Regarding demand of service tax from Militarry Engineering Services (MES), the appellant has submitted that they have constructed the civil structure for MES, viz. (a) Construction of computerized pilot section system building at Air Force Varanasi. (b) Construction of security perimeter wall news sub-station building for installation of new 3KV equipments at Air Force station Bamrauli along with electrical equipments. (c) Construction of residential accommodation 35 in nos. for the family of JCOs. All these civil construction has been done for the defense forces and are not for the purpose of commerce or industry. Therefore, such services are not covered under the taxable service defined under section 65 (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... structures, whether pre-fabricated or otherwise. Further, S.No.14 of the Mega Exemption notification specifically exempts the services by way of construction, erection, commissioning, or installation or original works pertaining to,- railways, including monorail or metro; 11. Apart from Works contract service, the taxable amount in FY 2012-13 is ₹ 5,32,008/= and in FY 2013-14 the same is only ₹ 82,160/= which are much below the threshold exemption limit. The appellant has also claimed before CESTAT that their gross turnover in FY 2011-12 was ₹ 248742/=, as recorded in para 2 of Allahabad bench and CESTAT final order no.71141/2017, dated 25.09.2017. Thus, the appellant are eligible to threshold exemption in FY 2012-13 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
