9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 685X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Cus, Kerala vs. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. [ 2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT] , the activity involving labour and service charges as well as supply of goods and material will rightly be classifiable under the Work Contract Service as the work contract service was introduced for levy of Service Tax with effect from 01.06.2007. The demand of Service Tax prior to a period 1.6.2007 is not legally not sustainable. From 1.6.2007 onwards the appellant has paid Service tax by availing the composition scheme for payment of Service Tax as per Notification No. 32 of 2007 dated 22.05.2007. by rightly classifying its activity under the works contract service . Appeal allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department that the appellant had wrongly switched over from the commercial or industrial service and construction of complex service to work contract service on the on-going projects and it had wrongly taken the benefit of Composition Scheme under the works contract service . Thereby lesser Service Tax was paid. 2. A show cause notice dated 15.10.2008 came to be issued to the appellant demanding Service Tax as mentioned above. The penal provisions under section 76, 77 and 78, penalty under 76 were applied and interest under section 75 of the Finance Act was also demanded from the appellant. The show cause notice came to be adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 18.12.2009 issued from F. No.IV(16) HQRS/ Adj/ YMC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as introduced by the Finance Act of 2007 from 1.6.2007, but by mistake it paid Service Tax under work contract service from 1.5.2007. It has also been contended by the learned advocate that Rule 3 of Works Contract (Composition Scheme for payment of Service Tax) Rules, 2007 contained in the Notification No. 32/2007-ST dated 22.5.2007 stipulates that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 2 A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules 2006, the person liable to pay service tax in relation to work contract service shall have the option to discharge his Service Tax liability instead of paying the Service Tax at the rate specified under section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 by paying an amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2007 is not legally not sustainable. From 1.6.2007 onwards the appellant has paid Service tax by availing the composition scheme for payment of Service Tax as per Notification No. 32 of 2007 dated 22.05.2007. by rightly classifying its activity under the works contract service . The Order in Appeal is, therefore, not sustainable and the appellant is not liable to pay any service tax beyond the Service Tax paid by it under the Composition Scheme. 7. In view of the above, we find that the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) deserves to be set aside and, is set aside. The appeal is accordingly, allowed. (Operative order of the order pronounced in the open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
