2017 (5) TMI 701

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t for the Assessee : Mr.Karan Sachdev, Advocate Present for the Revenue : Mr.Sanjay Jain, D.R. ORDER PER: S.K. MOHANTY Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order dated 31.03.2011 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Jaipur, both assesses as well as Revenue have filed the appeals before the Tribunal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a contractor engaged b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ices under works contract service. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. 4. The submissions of the assessee are that the impugned order has travelled beyond the scope of show cause notice inasmuch as the proposal in the show casue notice was to classify the services under ECI service, whereas the impugned order has confirmed the demand under the category of commissioning and installation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e specific findings that the services provided by the assessee are classifiable under works contract service w.e.f. 01/06/2007 and for that purpose, the assessee is registered under works contract and paying works contract tax to the Sales Tax Department. Since the activities undertaken by the assessee involves both supply of goods as well as provision of labour service, the same cannot be classif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X