9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 14(a) of Mega Exemption Notification No.25/2012- ST. This Tribunal has held in the precedent rulings that there is no distinction drawn by the statute with respect to public railways or private railways. It is further found that the work has been done and or the services provided to the Government companies like RITES, NTPC, IRCON, which are wholly owned by the Government of India and the management of these companies are controlled by the Ministry of Railways. The impugned order set aside - appeal allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /LOA. It appeared to Revenue that the appellant is required to discharge service tax liability including cess amounting to Rs.46,31,921/-. Reliance was placed on the letter issued by the Technical Officer (TRU-II), CBEC dated 02.08.2016 addressed to the AGM (Finance), RITES, clarifying that services of construction by way of laying down of tracks, merry-go-round and railway sidings for exclusive use of corporate houses and public sector undertakings, do not appear to be covered by exemption from service tax as provided in Entry 14 (a) of Notification No. 25/2012. Admittedly, the appellant have done following work/projects as mentioned in Para 7.5 of the SCN: - Sl. No. LOA No. Description Issuing Authority 1 Rites /S&T/Tender/ Rihand- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he project owners for the transportation of the goods cleared from their plant and there is no public carriage of passengers or goods. He also referred to the definition of "Railways" as per Section 2 (31) of the Railways Act, 1989, observing that as per the definition of the "Railways", it would imply that use for the public carriage, passenger or goods is essential for availment of the exemption. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant, inter-alia, urges that the issue herein is no longer res integra. This Tribunal in a catena of judgements have held that the exemption is provided in respect of railway. There is no differentiation between the public railway and/or private railway. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue in this regard and reject the same totally. In other words, the law has to be interpreted as it stood, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Doypack Systems Pvt. Ltd. [Manu/SC/0300/1988: 1988 (36) ELT 201 (SC)] wherein it has been held that the notings in the Government files are not relevant for interpretation of the statutes and the statute has to be interpreted by the wordings explicitly used therein and if there is no ambiguity in the language used therein, there is no need to refer to the notings in the Government file. On that ground also, the observation of the adjudicating authority has no bearing to the facts on hand and has to be rejected. " 7. This Tribunal took notice of notification No. 12/2012 - ST, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and strict construction of every word/phrase therein. The exemption from tax is available to 'railways' , excluding mono rail or metro, by notification no.25/2012-ST dated 20th June, 2012 after 1st July, 2012 and, as conceded by the adjudicating authority , there being no definition of 'railway', either therein or in the Finance Act, 1994, the distinction between railway for private purpose and railway for public service cannot be artificially contrived to suit tax administration; neither can the definition in another statute be drawn upon for the purported purpose of illumination. The Railways Act, 1989 was enacted to authorize Government of India to operate the railway network of the country; it also affords a framework for administration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
