9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 990X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant has provided work contract service to RSAMB during the financial year 2012-2013 alleged that service tax has not been paid by the appellant. Accordingly, vide Show cause notice No.33-TP/SGNR/2017/412 dated 21.11.2017 an amount of Rs. 24,16,157/- was proposed to be recovered as service tax along with the interest and the proportionate penalty. The said proposal was rejected vide Order-in-original No. 65/2019 dated 31.12.2019. The department preferred an appeal against the said order. The said appeal has been allowed vide the aforesaid order under challenge. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. I have heard Shri Mohit Gohlyan, learned Chartered Accountant appearing for the Appellant and Shri Mahesh Bhardwaj, lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is meant for commerce and industry. In paragraph 8 (4) of order under challenge Commissioner (Appeals) has clearly appreciated the same. It is also mentioned that the demand has also been set aside from the period 1.4.2012 to 30.6.2012 and for the demand of the period 1.4.2012 to 30.6.2012 even the benefit of composite scheme has been extended to the appellant. Order is, therefore, impressed to be reasonable and utmost justified and appeal is prayed to be dismissed. 5. After hearing the parties and perusing the records, it is observed that the moot controversy is as to whether the construction of common auction platform for RSAMB is the taxable service or not. Most of the period in the impugned appeal is post mega notification of 2012 vid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnment /local authority or governmental authority by way of construction, erection, commissioning or installation of original works pertaining to sub clause (d), that too for "Post harvest service infrastructure for an agriculture produce including the cold storage for said purpose. Perusal of these provisions makes it abundantly clear that any service provided to an agriculture produce marketing committee or any service relating to agriculture or agricultural produce even that of construction for infrastructure for agriculture or agriculture produce specially when provided to a government / local authority acting under statute meant for such use is different from Commerce or Industry, tax is not leviable on such service. 7. In the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the mandate of article 243 (W) of Constitution of India. (3) The service of construction as meant for agriculture produce is duly covered under negative list to take such construction out of the scope of taxability. 8. In view of these apparent and admitted facts irrespective that nature of impugned service is that of work contract service but there is no liability on the appellant to pay the service tax appellant being a statutory body and service provided is in negative list being meant for agriculture produce with no element of business or profit. Demand has therefore, wrongly been confirmed even for the period 1.4.2012 to 30.6.2012. Order under challenge is, accordingly set aside. Appeal is accordingly, allowed. (Pronounced in the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
