TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of refund claim on the ground that the appellants had not established the fact that they had provided works contract service to the main contractor i.e. M/s Malini Constructions during the relevant period - the fact remains to be scrutinized is whether the appellants had provided works contract service to M/s Malini Constructions, and accordingly, eligible to claim refund of service tax paid during the said period. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. ST/12015-12016/2017 - ORDER No. 10545-10546/2018 - Dated:- 12-3-2018 - Dr. D. M. Misra, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Jigar Shah, Ms. Priyanka Kalwari, Advocates For the Respondent : Ms. Nitina Nagori, AR ORDER Per : Dr. D. M. Misra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Government, a local authority etc., by way of Construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair and maintenance, and renovation etc, service tax held to be not leviable for the period 01.04.2015 to 29.02.2016. Accordingly, the service tax paid during the said period could be claimed as refund within six months from the date of the assent of the Finance Bill 2016, by the president. Consequently, the appellants filed refund claims within the period specified in the said Act with the department. The said refund claims were rejected. Aggrieved by the said orders, they filed appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who inturn, rejected their appeals. Hence, the present appeals. 3. Ld. Advocate S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im on the ground that the appellants could not establish before him that they provided works contract service to the main contractor. She has no objection in remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority to ascertain the said facts. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. The short issue involved in the present appeals is: whether the appellants being sub-contractors are entitled to refund of service tax paid on Construction Services used in the construction of the building for institute of Kidney Disease Research Center, when the original contract awarded to the main contractor, M/s Malini Constructions. I find that by virtue of Sr. No. 12 of the exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, the main contractor is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .e. along with service they also supplied materials in carrying out the construction of building meant for institute of Kidney Disease Research Canter, hence, eligible to the refund of the service tax paid during the relevant period. Thus, the fact remains to be scrutinized is whether the appellants had provided works contract service to M/s Malini Constructions, and accordingly, eligible to claim refund of service tax paid during the said period. The Advocate produced the ledger account and communication from the principal contractor claiming that they had provided works contract service to the principle contractor during the said period. These evidences have not been placed before the Adjudicating Authority. Therefore, in the interest o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
