9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een confirmed by the Ld. Commissioner under the category of Construction of Complex Services and Commercial or Industrial Construction Services as defined under the Section 65(30a) 65(91a) and 65(105)(zzzh) 65(105) (zzq) of Finance Act, 1994. Appellants claimed that their construction activity provided to the government not covered under the above sections as per the Explanation of Section 105 (zzzh) of the finance Act, 1994 and not covered under Section 105(zzq) of the Finance Act, 1994 as they have not provided services to commerce or industries. It is observed that in impugned orders Learned Commissioner has not considered the aforesaid claim of the appellants and confirmed the service tax demand on the ground that appellants hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce tax, Vadodara I, initiated an inquiry against the appellants stating that the appellants were providing taxable services under the category of (1) Construction of Complex Service (2) Commercial or Industrial Construction Service but not discharging service tax liability on the services rendered by them. On further inquiry, during the scrutiny of documents submitted by the appellants it was found that appellants are engaged in providing services related to construction works and activities related to repairs/ renovation for M/s GSPHCL, Anand Agricultural University, Anand and Executive Engineer s office. From the recorded statements of the appellants it was understood that the appellant had not taken any registration of service tax and h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ST/13696/2013 M/s D.R. Makwana F.No. V.ST(Adj)15-19/D.R. Makwana/Commr-I/2013 dated 20.03.2013 OIO No. 22/STC/COMMR/BRC-I/2013 dated 07.08.2013 Service tax demand of Rs. 1,95,71,516/- along with interest and penalties. 2. Shri Mrugesh Pandya, Learned Advocate appeared and argued for the appellants. He submits that the issue involved in the present appeal pertains to taxability of Construction Services provided to State Governments. The appellants have provided services inter-alia related to construction works and repairs/renovation for police quarters, Police Stations, Education Institution, Educational Museum, Court Building, Public Health Centers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .B. Chy Ruchi Ram Khattar Sons Vs. Commr. Of S.T., New Delhi -2015(38)STR 583 (Tri. Del.) Khurana Engineering Ltd. Vs. Commr. Of C.Ex., Ahmedabad 2011(21)STR 115 (Tri. Ahmd.) Sh,. DH Patel ad Sh. RN Dobariya Vs. CCE ST, Surat 2013(10)TMI-815 CESTAT, Ahmedabad Shri S. Kadirvel Vs. CCE ST, Trichy Vide Final Order No. 41504/2018 dated 11.05.2018 Brahma Developers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli- 2018(10)GSTL 27 (Tri. Chennai) Commissioner of C.Ex., Aurangabad Vs. Mall Enterprises- 2016(41) STR 199 (Tri. Mumbai) Mittal Construction Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex. ST, Jaipur I 2018(11)GSTL 334 (Tri. Del.) Sima Engg. Construction Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Trichy -2011(21)STR 179 (Tri. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directly provided the services to the government of Gujarat or Police department or others. 4.1 It is also observed that appellants have relied upon various case laws on the issue in hand, however the facts of each case needs to be examined to apply the ratio of the judgments relied upon by the appellants, which has not been done by the adjudicating authority in the present case. Since the adjudicating authority has not examined the claim of the appellants and the judgments relied upon in impugned orders, the matter needs to be remanded to the Adjudicating authority for fresh decision. 5. Accordingly, while keeping all the issues open, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals by way of remand to the Adjudicating Authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
