Works contract classification requires fresh scrutiny after Larsen & Toubro, with remand for reconsideration of tax liability.

The dispute concerned whether the appellant's services should be classified as works contract service and whether consequential tax liability, including abatement, needed reconsideration. The appellant relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Larsen & Toubro, which had not been available when the original adjudication was made. Since the factual contracts and the correct service classification had not been examined in light of that later binding precedent, fresh adjudication was required. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision after giving the appellant an opportunity to raise all contentions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the services rendered by the appellant required fresh examination for proper classification and consequential tax liability, including the claim to abatement.

Analysis: The appellant sought to classify the services as works contract service and requested reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court decision in Larsen & Toubro, which was not available at the time of the original adjudication. The Revenue did not oppose the request for remand. As the factual contracts and the correct service classification had not been examined on the basis of the later binding precedent, a fresh adjudication was necessary.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for fresh decision after granting the appellant an opportunity to raise all contentions.

---