9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... L INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, SECUNDERABAD G.S.T. [ 2019 (5) TMI 376 - CESTAT HYDERABAD ] and it has not been over-turned by any superior judicial forum and we do not find any reason to deviate from our earlier decision that the word railways in the section does not confine it to public railways or Govt railways. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. 25411 of 2013 - Final Order No./30695/2019 - Dated:- 19-6-2019 - Hon ble Ms Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) Hon ble Mr. P. Venkata Subba Rao, Member (Technical) Shri Sudhir V.S. Adv for the Appellant. Shri Mir Anwar Mohiuddin, Authorised Representative for the Respondent. ORDE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es or elevators; or (b) construction of a new building or a civil structure or a part thereof, or of a pipeline or conduit, primarily for the purposes of commerce or industry; or (c) construction of a new residential complex or a part thereof; or (d) completion and finishing services, repair, alteration, renovation or restoration of, or similar services, in relation to (b) and (c); or (e) turnkey projects including engineering, procurement and construction or commissioning (EPC) projects; The exclusion under Section 65(105)(zzzza) is in respect of activities undertaken with respect to roads, railways, transport terminals bridges, tunnels etc. and it is the case of the department that the ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be distinguished from being called as railways merely on the ground that it involves a commercial angle. This decision has been followed by Hon ble Delhi High Court as well in the case of DMRC itself titled as DMRC v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, 2008 (103) DRJ 369. Hon ble High Court Karnataka in the case of DMRC v. Ministry of Finance, 2013 (6) T.M.I. 78 has also held that work contract services in respect of railways are excluded under (13) Appeal No. ST/1710/2011 Clause 1 of 65(105) zzzza of the Act i.e. such contracts will fall outside the definition of taxable service and consequently no tax shall be leviable under Section 66 of the Act on the value of such services. This Tribunal in the case of M/s. IRCON International Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns made above as well as following the decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the demand of service tax under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service or Works Contract Service for the period from October 2004 to June 2007 and August 2007 to October 2009 respectively for construction of railway sidings/tracks cannot sustain and require to be set aside which we hereby do so. The matter has already been decided by this very Bench and it has not been over-turned by any superior judicial forum and we do not find any reason to deviate from our earlier decision that the word railways in the section does not confine it to public railways or Govt railways. Accordingly, we allow the appeal with consequential relief . The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
