TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORAM DR. S.L. PEERAN, HON BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL) SHRI T. K. JAYARAMAN, HON BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Per Shri T.K. Jayaraman This appeal has been filed against the Order-in-Original No. 32/2007 dated 07.03.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore. 2. S/Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar and N. Anand, the learned Advocates, appeared on behalf of the appellant and Smt. Sudha Koka, the learned SDR, for the Revenue. 3. We heard both sides. 4. Revenue proceeded against the appellant on the ground that they did not discharge the Service Tax liability under the category of Erection, Commissioning or Installation services for the period from July, 2003 to October, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to Service Tax w.e.f. 1.7.2003, there was further amendment in the year 2005 to bring erection under the Service Tax net and only w.e.f. 16.06.2005, according to the appellant, the erection of fire proofing system was made taxable. It was also submitted that the appellants had already discharged the Service Tax liability of Rs. 91,72,093/- being the Service Tax w.e.f. 16.06.2005 onwards when erection of fire proofing was brought under the Service Tax net. The learned Adjudicating Authority has come to the conclusion that the Service rendered by the appellant is taxable even with effect from 01.07.2003. He has also recorded the finding that if the appellant had any doubt, they could have approached the department but they themselves cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5(105)(zzzza) w.e.f. 01.06.2007. They also referred to the copy of the Finance Bill 2007 and the clarification issued by the Ministry. However, as an alternative submission, it was contended that even if the Services undertaken by them would fall under Erection, Commissioning or Installation services, then the liability to pay Service Tax would be only w.e.f. 16.06.2005 onwards and not prior to that date. This is because it is only from 16.06.2005, the Finance Act, 2005 has substituted the definition of Erection Commissioning or Installation in Section 65(39a) of the Act providing relief to services in relation to fire proofing under the above definition. 6. It was also pleaded that the demands are time barred. It was su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation of the longer period. 8. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that the appellant had urged several legal contentions. One of the main contentions was that the contract entered by the appellant with their client amounts to Works Contract and they are liable to Service Tax only w.e.f. 01.06.2007. On going through the Contract, we find that it is very clear that the appellant entered into contract with their client in respect of Fire Proofing. Since Fire Proofing service has been specifically included under the category of Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services w.e.f. 16.06.2005, we agree with the learned Counsels appearing for the appellant that these activities are rightly taxable under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the coverage under the new Tariff for the purpose of Tax is an area not covered by the earlier entry. The new entry is an extension of the scope of the coverage if Service Tax not carving out of a new entry, from the erstwhile entry . When the ratio of the above case is applied, the activity undertaken by the appellant more aptly fall into the extended definition effective from 16.06.2005. 9. Summing up, we hold that the appellants are liable to Service Tax for the services rendered by them only w.e.f. 16.06.2005. Therefore, the prayer in the appeal with regard to the following are allowed:- (i) Service Tax liability w.e.f. 16.06.2005 (ii) Benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST (iii) Al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
