2014 (5) TMI 339

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egarding the same. After correspondence with the appellants and also with the railways regarding the appellant's transactions with the railways, the department was of the view that the appellant, during 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 period, had provided taxable service of erection, installation and commissioning to the railways on which service tax chargeable was Rs. 3,62,613/-. It is on this basis that a show cause notice dated 23-1-2009 was issued to the appellant for demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 3,62,613/- along with interest and also imposition of penalty on them under Sections 76 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 16-3-2010 by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s matter for some time, we were of the view that this matter can be taken up for final disposal and accordingly the same was heard for final disposal, after waiving the pre-deposit. 2.1 Shri R.M.S. Sharma, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the appellant's contracts with railways were for supply of materials and other activity such as pumping of water from Mahi River to railway's overhead tanks, boring for tube wells, developing and testing of tube wells, painting and dismantling of lever frames, erection of structures, laying of S&T cables and supply and installation of signaling material in connection with providing interlocking of railways, that the contracts being indivisible contracts could not be vivis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....shing of lever frames, laying of S&T cables and supply and installation of signaling material in connection with providing interlocking of railways. It has also been pleaded that even if their contracts with the railways are vivisected for charging the service tax on the taxable service components, the component of the taxable service would be very small whose value during each year would be within the exemption limit prescribed under Notification No. 6/2005-S.T. However, on going through the impugned order, we find that in para 6.1 of the order, the Commissioner (Appeals) had given a categorical finding that the appellant have not disputed that their service to railways falls under the category of "erection, installation and commissioning ....