The Tribunal considered arguments from both sides and adjourned the further hearing to 13.03.2019.

The Tribunal considered arguments from both sides and adjourned the further hearing to 13.03.2019.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Commercial or Industrial Construction Service (CICS)
2. Erection, Commissioning, and Installation Service (ECIS)
3. Interior Decorator Service
4. Construction of Residential Complex Service

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

I. Commercial or Industrial Construction Service (CICS):

A. Project Name: MAHE
- Work involved: Construction of Indoor Stadium
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 17,27,456/-
- Ground for confirmation: The indoor stadium is used for rent, public functions, and events, generating income, hence considered commercial.
- Defence: The contract is composite, and the ratio from Commissioner of C.Ex. & Cus. Vs. M/s. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and M/s. Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

B. Project Name: DCW
- Work involved: Construction of water treatment plant and effluent treatment plant.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 18,87,946/-
- Ground for confirmation: The work is taxable.
- Defence: Main contractor has paid the tax; the contract is composite, and the ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

C. Project Name: SSP
- Work involved: Civil work at Steel Plant.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 5,55,873/-
- Ground for confirmation: The work is taxable.
- Defence: Sub-contractor status, main contractor discharged tax liability, relying on Power Mech Projects Ltd. case.

D. Project Name: SIPCOT, Perundurai
- Work involved: Construction of infrastructural building.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 4,25,660/-
- Ground for confirmation: Payment received after 01.03.2005.
- Defence: Composite contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

E. Project Name: KSR
- Work involved: Construction of civil and structural work.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 121,176/-
- Ground for confirmation: Tax is leviable even if not received from the client.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

F. Project Name: AMPA
- Work involved: Construction of Ampa centre.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 47,60,051/-
- Ground for confirmation: Tax is leviable even if not received from the client.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

G. Project Name: CHP
- Work involved: Construction of weaving park.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 41,71,534/-
- Ground for confirmation: Tax confirmed despite non-payment by the recipient.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

H. Project Name: NEWELI BRIDGE & ROAD
- Work involved: Construction of structural and electrical work.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 75,735/-
- Ground for confirmation: NLC is a commercial organization; no split-up figures provided.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

I. Project Name: VPR
- Work involved: Construction of civil work for effluent treatment plant.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 11,78,476/-
- Ground for confirmation: Treated as industrial purpose and taxable.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

II. Erection, Commissioning and Installation Service (ECIS):

A. Project Name: TWAD-LAKKA
- Work involved: Erection and Commissioning of Common Water Supply Scheme.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 2,79,001/-
- Ground for confirmation: Classified as Works Contract relying on Raipur Vs. BSBK Pvt. Ltd.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

B. Project Name: MRTS-SR
- Work involved: Electrification of station building.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 48,169/-
- Ground for confirmation: Classified as Works Contract relying on Raipur Vs. BSBK Pvt. Ltd.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

C. Project Name: KTC
- Work involved: Erection and Commissioning of submersible pump.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 11,21,993/-
- Ground for confirmation: Covered under plumbing, drain laying, and other installation for transport of fluids.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

D. Project Name: ATP
- Work involved: Water Supply Scheme.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 5,65,068/-
- Ground for confirmation: Work completed before 16.06.2005.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

E. Project Name: MTP
- Work involved: Erection and commission of CWSS.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 21,50,548/-
- Ground for confirmation: Not classified as Works Contract Service.
- Defence: Composite Works Contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

F. Project Name: HCC
- Work involved: Construction of intake raw water pumping station.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 1,90,208/-
- Ground for confirmation: Work completed before inclusion of ECIS.
- Defence: Public use, composite contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

G. Project Name: MGS-SUB
- Work involved: Erecting and Commissioning of emergency cooling for fire fighting water system.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 4,027/-
- Ground for confirmation: Work completed prior to ECIS introduction.
- Defence: Composite contract, ratio from Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. applies.

H. Project Name: L&T BIWADI
- Work involved: Materials supplied by the client.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 2,29,507/-
- Ground for confirmation: No evidence of main contractor paying service tax.
- Defence: Tax liability paid by the main contractor.

III. Interior Decorator Service:

A. Project Name: CPCL
- Work involved: Landscape development work.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 13,61,820/-
- Ground for confirmation: Service tax leviable for providing advice, consulting, technical assistance, etc.
- Defence: Only civil work provided, no advice or consulting, limited scope of "any other manner."

B. Project Name: PUZHAL
- Work involved: Beautification work of landscape.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 4,39,264/-
- Ground for confirmation: Service tax leviable for providing advice, consulting, technical assistance, etc.
- Defence: Only civil work provided, no advice or consulting, limited scope of "any other manner."

IV. Construction of Residential Complex Service:

A. Project Name: PPH
- Work involved: Construction of 161 quarters for police personnel.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 19,76,104/-
- Ground for confirmation: Police Housing Corporation is a commercial concern.
- Defence: Settled in cases like M/s. Bismi Engineering Contractors and M/s. Sima Engineering Constructions.

B. Project Name: APHS
- Work involved: Construction of police personnel quarters.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 38,659/-
- Ground for confirmation: Police Housing Corporation is a commercial concern.
- Defence: Settled in cases like M/s. Bismi Engineering Contractors and M/s. Sima Engineering Constructions.

C. Project Name: APH/NPP/PPH/PHD
- Work involved: Construction of police personnel quarters.
- Amount of Service Tax demanded: Rs. 19,19,898/-
- Ground for confirmation: Police Housing Corporation is a commercial concern.
- Defence: Settled in cases like M/s. Bismi Engineering Contractors and M/s. Sima Engineering Constructions.

Department's Arguments:
- Supported the impugned Order and reiterated the findings.
- Relied on different case laws such as M/s. G.D. Builders, M/s. BCC Developers and Promoters Pvt. Ltd., and M/s. National Building Construction Corporation Ltd.
- Argued that the scope of "any other manner" in Interior Decorator Service is wide.
- Contended that police quarters have a commercial intent as rent is collected.

Conclusion:
- The Tribunal considered the arguments from both sides and adjourned the further hearing to 13.03.2019.

---