Tribunal exempts service tax for turnkey projects post-2009, requires additional deposit for compliance

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant concerning the service tax demand on turnkey projects. It acknowledged the appellant's bona fide belief and exempted duty for projects started after October 2009. The Tribunal found the deposit sufficient for projects post-June 2007 but required additional deposit for compliance. Specific directions were given for a power generation project, with a waiver on balance dues and a 180-day stay against recovery. The judgment encompassed issues of service tax demands, exemptions, belief, pre-deposit requirements, Tribunal decisions, and compliance measures for distinct projects.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Service tax demand on turnkey projects under works contract definition; Exemption notification benefit; Bona fide belief of the appellant; Pre-deposit requirement for service tax liability; Applicability of Tribunal decision on projects started after 01.06.2007; Deposit amount for power generation project; Compliance and stay against recovery.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Service Tax Demand on Turnkey Projects:
The appellant was demanded service tax for the period from 01.06.2007 to 31.03.2012 on the basis that turnkey projects fall within the definition of 'Works Contract' as per Section 65(105) (zzzza) of Finance Act 1994. The demand amounted to more than Rs. 46.73 crores with interest and penalties imposed under Sections 77 & 78 of the Finance Act 1994. Reference was made to a previous Tribunal decision in a similar case.

2. Exemption Notification Benefit and Bona Fide Belief:
The appellant argued that for projects started after October 2009, where an exemption was granted for work related to canals, no duty should be demanded. However, for the period before October 2009, the appellant claimed to have a bona fide belief as they had been paying service tax even before 01.06.2007. The appellant's belief was supported by circulars from the Board, indicating that they were entitled to continue their practice.

3. Pre-deposit Requirement and Tribunal Decision Applicability:
For projects started after 01.06.2007, the Tribunal considered the deposit made by the appellant to be sufficient to cover the service tax liability up to September 2009. However, the appellant was directed to deposit an additional amount to ensure compliance. The Tribunal also noted that the decision in the Ramky Infrastructure case might be applicable to these projects.

4. Power Generation Project and Compliance:
One project related to a power generation project, for which the appellant relied on a specific case law. The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a specified amount within a given timeframe and report compliance. The pre-deposit requirement for the balance dues was waived, and a stay against recovery was granted for 180 days.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the various issues related to service tax demands on turnkey projects, exemption notifications, appellant's bona fide belief, pre-deposit requirements, applicability of Tribunal decisions, and compliance measures for specific projects. The detailed analysis provided insights into the legal reasoning and considerations taken into account by the Tribunal in reaching its decision.

---