TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1068X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n work of Railways? - Held that:- The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has decided the issue in favour of the respondent on the ground that the Revenue could not establish that the construction undertaken by the respondent were not in relation to Railways - We do not find merit in the said findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) inasmuch as the burden to claim exemption from the levy requires ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hav, Advocate for Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against Order-in- Appeal No. 60 dated 26.02.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax (Appeals), Mumbai. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondents were providing construction services (commercial and industrial building of civil structure). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, allowed their appeal. Hence, the present appeal by the Revenue. 3. Learned AR for the Revenue reiterating the grounds of appeal submitted that the respondent was awarded the contract for erection and commissioning of warehouse at Dronagiri for storing import and export cargo. It is their ground that the learned Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. We find that the short issue involved in the present appeal for determination is whether design, supply and erection of warehouse for exclusive use of CONCOR to store imported and export containerized cargo would fall under the scope of exclusion clause of construction work of Railways. In the impugned order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
