TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove, since the activities do not fall within any of the sub-headings - even though services have been rendered for railways, the benefit of notification No.25/2012 is not available to the appellant. The activities rendered by the appellants will be liable to service tax w.e.f. 01.07.2012 as has been held by the lower authority in the impugned orders. Consequently there is no ground at all to interfere with the findings of the lower authority in this regard. Remuneration paid by the appellant to its whole time Directors - levy of tax - whether the consideration paid to the full time Directors will be liable to service tax? - Held that: - the appellant had not placed any record, or any documentary evidence before the Adjudicating Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary works including ultrasonic testing of welded joints to the railways. After the introduction of the negative list based levy of service tax on various services w.e.f. 01.07.2012, the department was of the view that the activities carried out by the appellants were liable to payment of service tax. The department was further of the view that the appellant will not be eligible for the benefit of Mega Notification No.12/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012 which granted exemption from levy of service tax with respect to various services. Accordingly, the service tax was levied on the appellants on the consideration received form railways. The other point of dispute in Appeal No.ST/75604/2014 is the levy of service tax on the remuneration paid by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed out by the appellant for railways. The services rendered are by way of welding, drilling, joining of rails and rail panels and ancillary works. The claim of the appellant is that such activities will stand exempted under Sl.No.14 of the Exemption Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012 (w.e.f. 01.07.2012). Sl. No.14 of the said notification is as under: 14. Services by way of construction, erection, commissioning, or installation of original work pertaining to,- (a) An airport, port or railways, including monorail or metro; (b) A single residential unit otherwise than as a part of a residential complex; (c) Low-cost houses up to a carpet area of 60 square metres per house in a housing project approved by competent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orately discussed the reasons why the activities were not covered by the Sl.No.14 of the Notification (supra). After going through the detailed reasons we find no reason to take a different view. Consequently, even though services have been rendered for railways, the benefit of notification No.25/2012 is not available to the appellant. The activities rendered by the appellants will be liable to service tax w.e.f. 01.07.2012 as has been held by the lower authority in the impugned orders. Consequently there is no ground at all to interfere with the findings of the lower authority in this regard. 8. The second issue for consideration is whether the consideration paid to the full time Directors will be liable to service tax. The claim of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
