9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 380X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistered in the name of Rajasthan State Bridge and Construction Corporation Limited, to act as a nodal agency for construction of Bridges, Buildings and other Industrial Structure funded by Government of Rajasthan. It is further found that the Government Authority‟ is mentioned in Sl. No. 25 of the exemption notification, and is further elaborated in definition clause (s) of the said notification, which provides that Government Authority means a Board, or an authority or any other body established with 90% or more participation by way of equity or controlled by Government and set up by an Act of the Parliament or a State Legislature to carry out any function entrusted to a municipality under Article 243W of the Constitution. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant had received Works Contract Service‟ from M/s Jagdish Prasad Agarwal during the period July 2012 to March 2015, which is a declared service under Section 66E(h) of Finance Act, 1994 and taxable under Section 66B of Finance Act, 1994 w.e.f. 01.07.2012. Further, as per Notification No. 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, the service recipient is also liable to pay 50% of service tax liability, out of total service tax leviable on works contract services, on reverse charge basis, but appellant failed to pay the same. Accordingly, a show cause notice dated 12.10.2017 was issued to the appellant for demanding service tax amounting to Rs.4,92,028/- alongwith interest and proposing penalty under Section 77 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inarily entrusted to a municipality in relation to water supply, public health, sanitation conservancy, solid waste management or slum improvement and upgradation . 6. Accordingly, the appellant have urged that in view of the aforementioned exemption provisions, the service received by the appellant, A Government of Rajasthan Undertaking, is not taxable and hence there is no liability under the reverse charge mechanism on the Works Contract Service‟ received from their contractor. 7. The Adjudicating Authority was pleased to confirm the demand of Rs. 4,92,028/- under reverse charge mechanism for the receipt of services of Works Contract, from their sub-contractor for laying of pipeline for fresh water, alongwith equal amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1979 under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 and registered with Registrar of Companies having CIN No. U45203RJ1979SGC001853. I find that company has been established by the State Government, but not set up on an act of a State Legislature, hence the first part of definition is not satisfied that RSRDC has been set up by an act of State Legislature. In view of above, I find that M/s RSRDC (Appellant) is neither a Government, nor Local authority or a Government authority, as such I hold that the services received by the appellant has not been covered under Sr. No. 12 25 of the exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 as claimed by them . 9. Accordingly, he was pleased to confirm the demand and penalties. 10. Be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Limited, to act as a nodal agency for construction of Bridges, Buildings and other Industrial Structure funded by Government of Rajasthan. 13.1 I further find that the Government Authority‟ is mentioned in Sl. No. 25 of the exemption notification, and is further elaborated in definition clause (s) of the said notification, which provides that Government Authority means a Board, or an authority or any other body established with 90% or more participation by way of equity or controlled by Government and set up by an Act of the Parliament or a State Legislature to carry out any function entrusted to a municipality under Article 243W of the Constitution. 13.2 I find that admittedly the appellant company is established by the G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
