TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntract works undertaken in relation to canals would include pump houses and other facilities erected for lifting the water from lower to higher level of the canals, as would be the case in lift irrigation projects. For reasons alike as recorded in the interim order of this Tribunal dated 1-10-2013, we find a strong prima facie case in favour of the appellant/petitioner for waiver of the demand of ₹ 20,09,246. Effective date of notification - Held that:- It is axiomatic that an exemption Notification issued under Section 93(1) has no retrospective operation or reach. In the circumstances, we are not pursuaded, prima facie, that service provided prior to 23-10-2009, the date of Notification No. 41/2009-S.T. are immune to the levy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o October 2009, in respect of Polavaram Project Right Main Canal and Veligonda Project. In respect of works contract services provided on and after 23-10-2009, the learned Commissioner granted relief by excluding the consideration received on such post-23-10-2009 services provided, on the basis of exemption Notification No. 41/2009-S.T., dated 23-10-2009, whereby the Central Government, in purported exercise of powers under Section 93(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 granted exemption from the whole of the service tax leviable on works contract services provided in respect of canals other than those primarily used for the purposes of commerce or industry falling within the scope of Section 65(105)(zzzza) of the Act. The adjudicating authority, h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax. Such liability to tax came to be eclipsed only on the exercise of the power of exemption under Section 93(1) of the Act by issuance of Notification No. 41/2009-S.T. This Notification in clear terms exempts the taxable services referred to in Section 65(105)(zzzza) from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon when provided in the circumstances referred to in the Notification. It is, therefore, clear that the exemption Notification halts, as it were, the trajectory of the levy of tax on the taxable event occurring on and after issuance of the Notification. It is axiomatic that an exemption Notification issued under Section 93(1) has no retrospective operation or reach. In the circumstances, we are not pursuaded, prima facie, that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant/petitioner for waiver of the demand of ₹ 20,09,246/-. 5. Learned counsel would also contend that the demand of ₹ 85,47,332/- is based on the total values in the bills raised but not relatable to the actual consideration received and that the actual service tax on the consideration received is only around ₹ 77 lakhs. We, however, find no contention on the dispute as to the valuation in this area urged by the petitioner in response to the show-cause notice. We are therefore not inclined to undertake a detailed analysis of this valuation dispute, at this stage of the proceedings. 6. On the aforesaid prima facie analysis, we grant waiver of pre-deposit and stay of further proceedings for realization of the adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
