9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was engaged as a sub-contractor by M/s Simplex Infrastructure [Main contractor] which had been awarded a contract for construction of New International Terminal building complex at Jaipur Airport. The main contractor engaged the appellant as a sub-contractor for supplying, installation, testing and commissioning of heating, ventilation and air conditioning system at the building complex. According to the appellant, the contract awarded by the main contractor to the appellant involves both transfer of material as well as provisioning of services and, therefore, the contract is composite in nature. 3. A show cause notice dated 23.10.2012 was issued by the department alleging that the appellant was liable to pay service tax under erection, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice rendered by the appellant under works contract service for the reason that appellant had not paid VAT. 8. Shri A.K. Batra learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) committed an error in declining to categorise the services rendered by the appellant under works contract service solely for the reason that the appellant had not paid VAT on the transfer of propriety in goods involved in the execution of the contract. It is his submission that what was required to be examined was the nature of service actually performed by the appellant and not whether the appellant had paid VAT. 9. Learned authorized representative appearing for the Department has, however, supported the impugned order and also poin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 007. The Apex Court has also categorically held in its finding that such composite services cannot be liable for service tax under any other category prior to the introduction of WCS. In the light of the decisions of Apex Court, there can be no levy of service tax for the period upto 31.05.2007." 13. The reasoning given by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the services rendered by the appellant would not fall under works contract service for the reason that the appellant had not discharged the VAT liability on the transfer of goods involved in the execution of the contract is not correct. Classification of a service would depend upon the nature of service provided and not on whether VAT had been discharged on the goods portion of the contrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
