2009 (8) TMI 734

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri V. Ravi Rajendran, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)]. - The Appellant M/s. Unitech Power Transmission Ltd., was found to have engaged in the taxable activity of commissioning or installation during the period 1-7-03 to 9-9-04 and the activity of erection, commissioning or installation during the period 9-9-04 to 31-3-07 without .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le activity only with effect form 1-6-07. A part of the contract could not be vivisected and subjected to tax in terms of the ratio of the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Daelim Industries Co. Ltd., v. CCE, Vadodara - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 124 (Tri-Del.) = 2003 (155) E.L.T. 457 (Tribunal) and Diebold Systems (P) Ltd. v. CST - 2008 (9) S.T.R. 546 (Tri.-Che.). Our attention is also drawn to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ature of the contract is classifiable under erection, installation and commissioning. In view of the fact that appellants are assessed to value added tax under the category of works contract and in the light of the decisions of the Tribunal cited by the appellants, we are satisfied that the appellants have been able to make out a prima facie case against the dues adjudged against them. Under the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X