2018 (1) TMI 1135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in and Manish Gaur, Advocates - for the appellant. Shri Amresh Jain, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran The appeal is against order dated 28/02/2013 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur - I. The appellants are engaged in construction activities. They have entered into an agreement with M/s Marudhar Power Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad for the pur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the contract now in dispute is a composite works contract. There is no dispute on this fact. Such contracts are liable to service tax only w.e.f. 01/06/2007 as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE & CUS, Kerala Vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.). The present dispute is on tax liability on services rendered by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion during the material time is 4% and not 2%. Having discharged service tax under works contract service during 2009 appellant cannot take a plea that the services are not at all taxable. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal record. We note that the impugned order records that "it is evident that the noticee had provided the services during the period 2006-2007". Proceeding f....