9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Per (Dr) Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed by the assessee-Appellants against the order-in-original no. 38/RDN/2010 dated 28.07.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi. The period in dispute is 10.09.2004 to 30.09.2008. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee-Appellants are engaged in the business of construction of residential and commercial buildings. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E, Final Order No. 50697/2017 dated 06.02.2017, wherein the free material supplied by the service receiver was not included in the cost of the works contract. 4. By following the ratio laid down by this Tribunal (supra), we set aside the impugned order in this regard and allow the claim of the assessee/Appellants. 5. The next grievance is pertaining to ongoing contract as on 01.06.2007. The lowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : (1) With effect from 1-6-2007 the classification of the service rendered will be determined in accordance with the definitions of various services and if the classification is determined to be under works contract service, the benefit of Composition Scheme will not be available in respect of such contracts which commenced prior to 1-6-2007; (2) If the appellants claim the benefit of Rule 2A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded to the SEZ Unit. 9. After hearing both sides, it appears that the exemption under Notification No. 4/2004-ST dated 31.03.2004 requires the approval of the SEZ developer/unit. The said approval was submitted by the assessee-Appellants, but the lower authorities have not taken any cognizance. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the assessee-Appellants submits that the same c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
