TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 792X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , or of pipeline or conduit, primarily for the purposes of commerce or industry is within the purpose of tax. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - APPEAL No.ST/70495/2017-CU[DB] - FINAL ORDER NO-72828/2018 - Dated:- 6-12-2018 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Shiv Pratap Singh, Deputy Commissioner (AR) for Appellant Absent, for Respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), revenue has filed the present appeal. We have heard the learned A.R. for revenue, no body appeared for revenue. 2. On going through the facts on record we note that the respondent was registered with the Servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clear that completion and finishing services, repair, alternation, renovation or restoration of, or similar services, in relation to construction of a new building or a civil structure or a part thereof, or of pipeline or conduit, primarily for the purposes of commerce or industry is within the purpose of tax. In other words, completion and finishing services, repair, alteration, renovation or restoration of, or similar services, in relation to a new building of civil structure or a part thereof which is not primarily for the purpose of commerce or industry is not subject to service tax. The Appellate Authority has further held that primary purpose of IIT, Kanpur and CPWD is not for commerce and industry. Therefore, the contracts executed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. Accordingly, the appellate authority has allowed the appeal of the party. Hence the present appeal by the Revenue. 5. We find that for arriving at the above findings, the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the Boards Circular as also Hon ble Patna High Court s decision in the case of M/s Shapoorji Paloonji Company (P) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise Service Tax 2016-TIOL-556-HC-PATNA-ST. The revenue in their memo of appeal, nowhere contested the applicability of the said decision. Otherwise also, we find that Board Circular supports the assessee s case and it is well settled law that revenue cannot go against the Board Circular. As such, we find no justification to interfere in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
