TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 571
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri Manish Gaur, Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Suchitra Sharma, D.R. ORDER PER R.K. SINGH: Stay application along with appeal has been filed against order-in-original dated 6.8.2013 in terms of which service tax demand of Rs. 5,54,77,175/- for the period 2008-09 to 2011-12 was confirmed along with interest and penalties under works contract service on the ground that the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces has not been mentioned in the impugned order which makes the demand unsustainable. He also stated that the ESIC hospital building is not for business or commercial and therefore would not fall under sub-clause (b) of clause (ii) of the said Explanation. As regards girls hostel, he stated that it was used the students as a hostel of the Govt. institute and therefore was meant for personal use t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....learly mentioned in the impugned order as WCS [(65)(105)(zzzza)] and therefore prima facie we do not agree that the demand is fatally hit by virtue of non-mention of specific sub-clauses (a)/(b)/(c)/(d) of clause (ii) of the said Explanation, the demand relating to construction of ESIC hospital prima facie would not be covered under construction of new building or structure for the purpose of comm....