TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Exemption from Service Tax for Railway Sidings Under Finance Act, 1994 and Notification No. 25/2012.</h1> The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) decision that exempted the respondent from service tax under Section ... Exemption of service tax u/s 65 (105) (zzzza) of the Finance Act, 1994 - Notification No. 25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 for construction work related to railways - HELD THAT:- There is justification in the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent in as much as the issue involved has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in SMS Infrastructure Limited [2016 (9) TMI 843 - CESTAT MUMBAI]. The same view was taken by the Tribunal in Anand Construction [2017 (9) TMI 81 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] and Tracks and Towers Infratech [2020 (2) TMI 40 - CESTAT NEW DELHI]. There is no good reason to differ with the aforesaid views expressed by the benches of the Tribunal. There is, therefore, no illegality in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Issues involved: The issue in this case revolves around the exemption of service tax u/s 65 (105) (zzzza) of the Finance Act, 1994 and Notification No. 25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 for construction work related to railways.Summary: The Department appealed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which set aside the demand for service tax on the respondent. The dispute centered on whether the respondent was exempt from service tax for work related to railways. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal based on the exemption provisions and relevant case law. The Department contended that the exemption did not apply as the railways were not used for public carriage. The respondent argued in favor of the exemption citing Tribunal decisions. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, relying on previous rulings and the exclusionary portion of Section 65(25a) to determine that the railway sidings constructed by the respondent were outside the scope of taxation. The Tribunal found no reason to disagree with the previous decisions and dismissed the appeal accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
