2014 (8) TMI 231

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by a common order. The period of dispute in both the appeals is from 01/10/05 to 31/03/07. Both the respondents during the period of dispute were providing the services of commercial or industrial construction service to HPCL and were registered for payment of service tax. W.e.f. 01/06/07, Section 65 (105) (zzzza) was introduced to cover works contract service which is defined in this sub-clause as the service provided or to be provided to any person by any other person in relation to the execution of a works contract, excluding works contract in respect of roads, airports, railways, transport terminals, bridges, tunnels and dams. The explanation to this clause defined works contract as under :- SECTION [65(105) (zzzza) :- Explanation....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t to gross amount charged for works contract minus the value of transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of the said works contract on which service tax/value added tax has been paid. By Notification No. 32/2007-ST dated 22/05/07 the Central Government in exercise of the powers under Section 93 and 94 of the Finance Act, 1994 notified Works Contract (composition scheme for payment of service tax) Rules, 2007. The respondent after introduction of works contract service w.e.f. 01/06/07 filed refund claims on the ground that the services being provided by them were covered by works contract service, which became taxable only w.e.f. 01/06/07 and hence during the period prior to 01/06/07 the same were not taxable. The refund claim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondent. 5. There is no dispute that both the respondents during the period of dispute had provided the services of commercial or industrial construction which were taxable at that time under Section 65 (105) (zzq) readwith Section 65 (25b). The respondent's plea is that since w.e.f. 01/06/07, their activity became taxable as works contract service under Section 65 (105) (zzzza), during the period prior to 01/06/07, their activity would not be taxable. But this plea of the respondent is not acceptable in view of judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of G.D. Builders vs. Union of India (supra), wherein this very issue has been decided by Hon'ble Delhi High Court against the respondent. Moreover, the Tribunal also in the cases of....