TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lation Service and the adjudicating authority has also confirmed the demand under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Service. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) has travelled beyond the Show Cause Notice to confirm the demand under Works Contract Service - Furthermore, in the decision of M/s. Real Value Promoters Ltd. [ 2018 (9) TMI 1149 - CESTAT CHENNAI ], the Tribunal has held that the demand of Service Tax under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services cannot sustain for composite contracts for the period post 01.06.2007 - Thus the demand of Service Tax under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services/Works Contract Services cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. Co-consultancy Services - it is alleged tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount of ₹ 6,04,461/-. After due process of law, the Original Authority confirmed the Service Tax along with interest and imposed penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2.2 Aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide Order impugned herein upheld the demand of Service Tax on Co-consultancy Services and also upheld the demand of Service Tax towards Works Contract Service after directing to re-quantify the amount under Works Contract Service. The penalty was ordered to be re-quantified and revised accordingly. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 3.1 Ld. Advocate Shri. N. Viswanathan appeared and argued the matter on behalf of the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the levy of Service Tax on such composite contracts cannot sustain. Even thereafter, the Service Tax demand cannot sustain under the category of Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services , as held by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ors. Vs. Commissioner of G.S.T. Central Excise, Chennai reported in 2018-TIOL-2867-CESTAT-MAD. 3.3 With regard to the demand of Service Tax on Co-consultancy Services, he submitted that the main service provider was raising invoices including the Service Tax. The appellant therefore, being a person who was rendering Co-consultancy Services, was of the bona fide belief that the Service Tax discharged by the main service provider would suffice and tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irmation of demand by the authorities below is therefore legal and proper. 4.2 With regard to the issue on Co-consultancy Services, Ld. AR submitted that the appellant had not discharged Service Tax for the disputed period, which is from 2005-06 to 2007-08. Even though the appellant has rendered services only as a Co-consultant, is liable to discharge Service Tax on the amount received by them for rendering such services. The Department has clarified the said issue as to the liability of the Sub-contractor to pay Service Tax vide Master Circular No. 96/7/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007. 5. Heard both sides. 6.1 The main issue is with regard to the demand of Service Tax under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioning and Installation Service, the confirmation of demand under Works Contract Service is highly erroneous and unsustainable. 6.3 Furthermore, in the decision of M/s. Real Value Promoters Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal has held that the demand of Service Tax under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services cannot sustain for composite contracts for the period post 01.06.2007. For these reasons, we hold that the demand of Service Tax under Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services/Works Contract Services cannot sustain and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. 7.1 The second issue is with regard to Co-consultancy Services. In the Show Cause Notice, it is alleged that the appellant has not paid the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
