2017 (1) TMI 308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri Govind Dixit, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. Per. V. Padmanabhan :- The present appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal dated 21/02/2011 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Ceramic sanitary- ware products classifiable under Chapter 69 of the Central Excise Tariff. The appellant entered into a cont....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. When this order was challenged before Commissioner (Appeals), he confirmed the order-in-original vide the impugned order. In the present appeal, the main grounds are as follows :- (i) the activities undertaken by the foreign supplier cannot be subjected to levy of service tax during the period 2005-2006 for the reason that the import ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng knowhow will not amount to rendering consulting engineer service. Further, they have also objected to the charging of service tax under erection, commissioning or installation service with their argument that these activities were undertaken by the appellant with the help of the technical personnel provided by the foreign supplier. 2. We have heard Shri Manish Gaur, learned Advocate for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../2007. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (supra) has categorically held that any contract in the nature of works contract cannot be vivisected into its various elements and charged to service tax separately for the period prior to 01/06/2007 when WCS was introduced in the statute. In the present case the import of the machinery alongwith the associated services was ....