TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1001X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n question is of works contract service, which was not taxable upto 1.6.2007 - demand for the period upto 1.6.2007 set aside. As regards the period after 1.6.2007, since the demand was raised under ‘commercial or industrial construction service, whereas admittedly the service is correctly classifiable under works contract service, the demand raised under wrong head of service cannot sustain. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/85920/13 - A/88761/17/STB - Dated:- 27-7-2017 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) and Shri Raju, Member (Technical) Shri P. V. Sadavarte, Advocate for Appellant Shri B.K. lyer, Supdt. (AR) for Respondent ORDER The appellant is providing construction service. The departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly in a case when the value of material used in construction is included in the gross value of construction. Therefore, there is no dispute that the service of construction was provided along with material. The appellant also discharged the VAT tax liability on works contract service. In such situation, the service is correctly classifiable under 'works contract service'. The works contract service became taxable only w.e.f. 1.6.2007. Therefore, prior to this date, the service which is of works contract was not taxable. Hence, no tax liability arises. This issue has also been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of L T Ltd. - 2015-TIOL- 187-SC-ST. 2.1 As regards the period after 1.6.2007 is concerned, since the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09-10 . From the above facts, the learned Commissioner contended that there was no dispute about the classification of the service. In this regard on going through the statements of the appellant, we find that the appellant stated that they have started paying Service Tax after introduction of works contract service. This shows that the appellant has been treating their service as-works contract service. Moreover as per the facts that the construction service was provided along with the material and the appellant has paid the works contract tax, the service in question is classifiable under works contract service. Therefore, it is incorrect on the part of the adjudicating authority to say that there was no dispute of classification of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
