2011 (3) TMI 617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ties: (a) 2% per month u/s 76 and (b) Rs.2,45,00,000/- u/s 78 of the Act. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The above recorded demand of the Service Tax liability, the interest thereof and the penalties has arisen on the ground that the appellant had been providing services of 'Erection, Commissioning and Installation' and has not discharged Service Tax liability. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would draw our attention to the Order-in-Original. He would submit that the appellant herein is engaged in construction of tunnels or conduit, which is called as Penstocks for the river valley projects for M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd; M/s. Skanska Cementation Ltd. and M/s. Gammon India Ltd. It is his....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It is his submission that the activity, as explained by the appellant, would clearly fall under the category of 'other installations for transport of fluids' as the appellant is creating a closed conduit, which is an indispensable installation for transportation of water. It is his submission that this transportation of water through tunnels is nothing but erection, commissioning and installation of a power project and has to be read harmoniously. He would also submit that the definition of penstock, as given under the "Glossary of Terms relating to River Valley Projects" published by the Bureau of Indian Standards would be applicable in this case. It is his submission that the appellants should be put to strict terms, as they have not pa....