2017 (5) TMI 191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 77,09,423/- as provider of 'business auxiliary service', 'site formation and clearance service', 'mining service' and 'supply of tangible goods service' for the period from 2005-06 to 2009-10. 2. Vide impugned order, the original authority confirmed tax liability of Rs. 38,78,989 - in the category of 'mining service' amounting to Rs. 38,59,987 covering five work orders out of a demand of Rs. 38,63,652, Rs. 1,16,157 as provider of 'site formation and clearance service' in one work order while dropping demand of Rs. 29,62,779 relating to three work orders, and Rs. 3,244 as provider of 'supply of tangible goods service' in relation to one work order while dropping demand of Rs. 3,59,4....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....referred any appeal thereby attaining finality insofar as the stand of the tax authority is concerned. On perusal of the order furnished by Learned Counsel, we find this to be so. Likewise the demand of Rs. 6,80,245 is similarly situated. Accordingly, we set aside this portion of the demand in the impugned order. 5. Learned Counsel also pointed out that the demand in the category of 'mining service' for an amount of Rs. 7,47,013 pertains to work order issued by M/s PBA Infrastructure Ltd for a road project in MIHAN SEZ and is not covered in the show cause notice issued to assessee. We find this to be the correct factual position and, accordingly, hold that this demand in the impugned order is not sustainable. 6. The plea, rend....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction Corporation Ltd and that classification under a different category on the subsequent date does not preclude taxability under an existing head. The decision of the Tribunal in Vadehra Builders Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Service Tax, New Delhi [2015 (39) STR 88 (Tri-Del)] was relied upon. It was also argued that the work order of M/s Meenakshi Infrastructure Pvt Ltd involving tax liability of Rs. 1,25,700 had also been incorrectly held by the adjudicating authority to be 'transportation of goods' when the activity involved procurement of inputs. It is also contended that the activity rendered in connection with the work orders of M/s Meenakshi Infrastructure Pvt Ltd involving tax of Rs. 3,37,009 and with M/s KK Earthmovers was not....