9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken by the appellant is tenable, since it involved composite supply of goods as well as services. The issue pertains to the period 2005-06 to 2007-08. 2. The brief facts are appellant is engaged in the activity of execution of Electrical Contract works like installation of electrical equipment, transformers, etc. Appellant was paying service tax as applicable, after 01.06.2007, appellant started remitting service tax under the 'Works Contract Service', owing to the inclusion of 'Works Contract Service' under the purview of taxation under Finance Act, 1994. Alleging that part of contract for which appellant was remitting Sales Tax/VAT was falling under the category of Service Tax and considering such service under the catego ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t work and trading of electrical goods; they had taken registration under; Erection, Commissioning or installation' services in 2005 and had further added Works Contract service in 2007; investigations revealed that they had not paid /short paid service tax during the period 2005 to 2008; all these projects were ongoing projects; as per Rule 3(3) of Notification 32/2007-ST dated 22.05.2007 and Circular No.98/1/2008-ST dated 04.01.2008, the ongoing projects would continue to remain classifiable under 'Erection, Commissioning or Installation' service and will not be classified under "Works Contract' service: the fact is that the appellants had themselves classified the services as 'erection, commissioning or installation&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rks contract prior to introduction of the Finance Act, 2007 on 1-6-2007. In the said Judgment it was held that prior to 01.06.2007, the activity in the nature of work contract were not taxable. Whereas the issue involved in the present matter is whether Appellant were entitled to the benefit of the payment of service tax under the composition scheme on ongoing projects. Clearly, case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. is on different footing and has no relevance to the present case." 8. The learned AR further submitted that; the Hon'ble Tribunal has discussed the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of L&T Ltd.,- 2015 (39) STR 913 as well as the Judgement in the case of Nagarjuna Constructions cited above. Therefore, it is submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
