TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23; under Section 65(105)(zzzq) will continue to be attracted only if the activities are in the nature of services‟ simpliciter. The impugned order cannot then sustain and requires to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/284/2012 - 42613/2018 - Dated:- 15-10-2018 - Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) And Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Ms. S. Vishnupriya, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) ORDER PER SHRI MADHU MOHAN DAMODHAR M/s.Ceebros Property Development, the appellant herein is engaged in providing Construction Service. During the course of audit, it was noticed that appellants have rendered into an agreement with M/s.Shyamala Pictures and Hotel (P) Ltd. (land owner) for construction of a residential complex and commercial complex. As per the agreement, the land owner handed over the land to the appellants for the purpose of construction of 7,25,305 sq. ft of commercial and residential complex. As per the agreement, the appellants were parted with 1,24,812/- sq.ft of undivided share of land in their favour and in consideration, they had agreed to construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transfer of property in goods could be covered under CICS and RCS from the date of introduction of service tax levy on such services stands finally settled by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Cus., Kerala Vs L T Ltd. [2015 (39) STR 913 (SC)]. Ld. Advocate submits that the very same issue is also squarely covered by the recent decision of this Bench in the appellant s own case vide Final Order No.42436-42438/2018 dt. 18.09.2018. She also placed reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Vishranthi Homes Pvt. Ltd. Vs CGST Final Order No.42468 dt.24.09.2018. 3. Heard Ld. A.R Shri A. Cletus who supports the impugned order. 4. After hearing both sides, and on perusal of records, we find merit in the Ld. Advocate s assertion that the issue stands squarely covered by the decision of this Bench in appellant s own case vide Final Order No.42436-42438/2018 dt. 18.09.2018. The relevant portions of the order are reproduced as under : 7.5 There was considerable litigation on the issue whether service tax can be levied on indivisible works contract prior to its introduction from 1.6.2007 which was finally settled by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s contract then will not be liable to service tax levy prior to 1.6.2007. On the same ratio, such composite contracts even for the period after 1.6.2007 disputed in these appeals will still have to be held as composite works contract only and not pure service simpliciter contracts that could be classified under commercial or industrial construction service, or construction of complex service. To put in another way, to merit being classified as CICS or CCS, the service provider concerned will be rendering only service simpliciter without any other element in them namely without any material or goods supply involved. That is definitely not the case in the facts of these appeals. The activities of the appellants will therefore continue to be in the nature of composite works contractservicesand hence even after 1.6.2007 for the periods disputed in these appeals they cannot be brought within the fold of commercial or industrial construction service or construction of complex service as proposed in the show cause notices and confirmed in the impugned orders. 7.8 On the contrary, being composite works contracts, they will necessarily fall within the ambit of works contract service as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on the specific entries and the more specific description of service has to be preferred. He invited our attention to CBEC s Circular 128/10/2010 dated 24.8.2010 which is reproduced as under:- The matter has been examined. As regards the classification, with effect from 1-6-2007 when the new service Works Contract service was made effective, classification of aforesaid services would undergo a change in case of long term contracts even though part of the service was classified under the respective taxable service prior to 1-6-2007. This is because works contract describes the nature of the activity more specifically and, therefore, as per the provisions of Section 65A of the Finance Act, 1994, it would be the appropriate classification for the part of the service provided after that date. 7.12 Thus, for example, while construction of a new residential complex as a service simpliciter would find a place under section 65(105)(30b) of the Act, the same activity as a composite works contract will require to be brought under section 65(105)(zzzza) Explanation (c). For both these categories for the definition of residential complex, the definition given in section 65(10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
