9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o 1.7.2010 and hence, the impugned order cannot sustain. - HON BLE MR. P. DINESHA , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON BLE MR. VASA SESHAGIRI RAO , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Smt. Radhika Chandrasekar , Advocate for the Appellant Shri M. Selvakumar , Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER Per : Shri P. Dinesha This appeal is filed by the assessee against the Order--in--Appeal No.48/2014 (M--III)--ST dated 1.4.2014 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai whereby the demand of service tax on the construction services rendered by the appellant stood upheld. 2. Smt. Radhika Chandrasekar, Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant would submit, at the outset, that the appellant who is engaged in construction of complex/res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10, by following the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of CCE CC Kerala Vs Larsen Toubro Ltd. (supra). In one of the recent orders in the case of M/s.Casa Grande Private Ltd. Vs CST Chennai vide Final Order No.40255/2023 dated 06.04.2023, this Bench has referred some of the orders of CESTAT Benches and held as under :-- 10. We find that the Order of the co--ordinate Hyderabad Bench of the CESTAT in the case of M/s. Pragati Edifice Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is a more recent one, which has considered many orders of other co--ordinate Benches and also the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Kerala v. M/s. Larsen Toubro Ltd. [2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.)], and has opined as under: -- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact which can be verified to ascertain the full tax liability for the period post 1--7--2010 or otherwise. (Emphasis supplied by us, in bold, for clarity) 11.1 We have gone through the orders of the various CESTAT Benches which have been considered by the Hyderabad Bench of the CESTAT in M/s. Pragati Edifice Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the relevant observation of which has been extracted hereinabove. We find that it has been categorically held that no Service Tax could be levied on construction of residential complexes prior to 01.07.2010 even when the service is rendered either as service simpliciter or as a works contract. 11.2 Evidently, in the case on hand, the period of dispute is up to September 2010 and hence, in view of the above, the liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
