9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry No. 13 thereof, for construction of road for use of general public but not the services for constructing road simpliciter. Emphasis therein is on the word 'public'. Public place is defined in Section 2(34) of Motor Vehicles Act as a road, street, way or other place, whether a thoroughfare or not, to which the public have a right of access - in order that a place may fall within the ambit of the definition of public place, the element of right of access of public on such road is a necessary concomitant. To hold that this definition is intended to rope in places where public have no right of access would amount to enlarge the definition to an unrecognisable proportion and in such a case, every private place, may have to be regarded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A GUPTA The officers of DGCEI, Delhi Zonal Unit, New Delhi developed an intelligence that M/s Paramount Infraventures Pvt., Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the Contractor), having their office at W- 15, J/14, Western Avenue, Sainik Farms, New Delhi, had constructed the earthen embankment for F-1 Race Track (Formula One Grand Prix) for M/s Jaypee Sports International Ltd., NOIDA (Gautam Buddh Nagar) (hereinafter referred to as the Owner), but had not discharged their appropriate service tax liability. Based there upon the investigations in the matter were conducted. After perusing the chart of bills and the copy of contracts as provided by the appellants, department observed as follows: (i) Site Formation and Clearance, Excavation Earth Mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant has submitted that scope of this contract includes site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving, soil stabilization and demolition etc, which is covered under Site Preparation Service defined under Section 65(105)(zzza) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Contractor vide his letter dated 06.08.2014, has claimed full exemption from payment of Service Tax in terms of Notification No. 17/2005-ST dated 07.06.2005, on the ground that the earthwork undertaken by them related to roads specially laid for conducting motor race on it and other connecting roads within the Buddha International Circuit. 3.1 It is further submitted that the service under another contract (as mentioned above) pertained to construction work of storm water and s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder challenge is prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned Departmental Representative on behalf of the department has reiterated the findings in the order under challenge. It is mentioned that to claim the benefit of Notification No. 17/2005 dated 07.06.2005, the construction should have been for public road. The said notification is wrongly relied by the appellant with the sole intent to evade tax. Impressing upon no infirmity in the order under challenge, the appeal is prayed to be dismissed. 5. Having heard both the parties and perusing the entire record of impugned appeal memo, it is observed and held as follows: 5.1 Apparently and admittedly the appellants had entered into three contracts (as m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , maintenance, renovation, or alteration of,- (a) a road, bridge, tunnel, or terminal for road transportation for use by general public. 5.3 Bare perusal clarifies that activity of construction of road which is meant for use by general public is exempted from whole duty. Admittedly appellant constructed car race track. Whether such track can be called as road for use by general public. What is exempted in the Notification No. 17/2005 is the service, as named in Entry No. 13 thereof, for construction of road for use of general public but not the services for constructing road simpliciter. Emphasis therein is on the word 'public'. Public place is defined in Section 2(34) of Motor Vehicles Act as a road, street, way or other place, whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these definitions the race track constructed by appellant is definitely a Road'. But to avail the benefit of the Notification no. 17/2005 appellant should have constructed a road meant for use of public i.e. a public road/place. The race track constructed by appellant is apparently and admittedly is not meant for public access as a matter of right. In the light of discussion about definition of public place above, we hold that though impugned race track is a road but public has no access as a matter of right thereupon. Hence we hold that the impugned race tracks are not meant for public use, hence are not covered under Entry No. 13 of Notification 17/2005. The appellant is held to have wrongly availed the exemption under said notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
