Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Royal Electricals Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I

2017 (11) TMI 298 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Works contract - erection, installation and commission of street lights - non-paymnet of service tax - The only defence of the appellant as regard the service of installation of street lights is that the service is related to the road therefore it is excluded from the taxable service under the head of works contract - Held that: - the installation of street lights is totally an independent service which is nothing to do with the road construction, the street lights may or may not be required bes .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g the provision of service. In these circumstances there is a clear suppression of fact on the part of the appellant - extended period rightly invoked. - As regard the claim of the appellant that certain services like laying of cable shifting of cable for the purpose of widening of road etc. a service tax demand of ₹ 8919/- is not sustainable - Held that: - such service is not taxable as per the Board Circular No. 123/05/2010 dt. 24.5.2010 - demand set aside. - Appeal allowed in pa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ersion of HT/LT Overhead line to underground cable, installation of transformers, erection and fixing of street lights, shifting and fixing of HT/LT conductors etc. for which the appellants were receiving amount as already fixed by the above clients, though the appellant was paying service tax on certain activities under works contract service but during the period 2007-08 to 2010-11, they have not discharged the service tax on erection, installation and commission of street lights under the wor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

information in the ST.3 return. Being aggrieved by the order-in-original, appellant filed this appeal. 2. Shri Shankar Patil, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the demand was mainly raised in respect of installation of street light. He submits that such service is in relation to road. The service in relation to road is not taxable under the works contract service therefore demand is not sustainable. He further submits that the service on which demand was raised also i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

resaid service involved a service tax of ₹ 8,919/- which is not sustainable for the reasons stated above in terms of Board Circular dt. 24.5.2010. He further submits that the entire demand is time barred as show cause notice dt. 9.10.2012 was issued for the period May 2007 to March 2011. He submits that for the period 2005-06 to 2006-07 earlier show cause notice dt. 16.4.2010 was issued. Therefore the activity of the appellant was very well known to the department hence there was no suppre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ks contract service. As regard limitation she submits that even though the show cause notice for the earlier period was issued but the appellant for the subsequent period did not disclose the transaction of the service of installation of street lights in their ST-3 Return. Therefore the department had no occasion to know whether the appellant have rendered any other taxable service other than the service declared in ST-3 Returns, therefore there is a clear suppression of fact. 4. We have careful .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hts may or may not be required besides the road, therefore it is not related to construction of road. Accordingly the service of installation of street lights being an independent service clearly falls under works contract service and during the relevant period it was taxable. As regard the limitation, we find that though earlier show cause notice dt. 16.4.2010 was issued for the period 2005-06 to 2006-07 but the services being a contract service based on the independent contract. For the subseq .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the installation service of street light is taxable. Therefore firstly appellant had not declared the transaction in their ST-3 return subsequently despite knowing the taxability of the said service, they have not come forward and informed to the department regarding the provision of service. In these circumstances there is a clear suppression of fact on the part of the appellant. As per the above observation, we uphold the demand of service tax in respect of installation of street lights u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng would be the tax status of some of the activities in respect of which disputes have arisen,- S. No. Activity Status 1. Shifting of overhead cables/wires for any reasons such as widening/renovation of roads Not a taxable service under any clause of sub-section (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 2. Laying of cables under or alongside roads Not a taxable service under any clause of sub-section (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 3. Laying of electric cables between grids/sub-s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version