TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1027
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....group which are disposed of by a common order as the issue involved in all the appeals is same. 2. When the matter was called out, Ld. Counsel submits that appeal No. ST/21102, 3026/2017of the same appellant is on same issue. We called for appeal records from the registry and on perusal we find it so, accordingly, these appeals are also disposed by this order. 3. The following appeals are disposed of: S.NO. APPEAL No. APPELLANT RESPONDENT OIO/OIA No. PERIOD 1. ST/2572/2012 GVK Power & Infrastructure Ltd., CCE & C- Visakhapatnam-ii 44/2012(RS) Dated 07/06/2012. Nov.2010 to Jun.2011 2. ST/25738/2013 GVK Energy Ltd., CCE & C- Visakhapatnam-ii 73/2012 (BVSNK) Dated 30/11/2012. Jul.2011....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....produce electricity, which is either wheeled out to the grid and received by the said GVK Industries Ltd., or used for captive consumption. According to the revenue authorities, appellant by receiving compensation as agreed for maintaining and repairing the power plants, is taxable under the category of maintenance or repair services . A Show Cause Notice was issued for demanding service tax an amount received as consideration and interest thereof and penalties were also sought to be imposed. Appellant contested the Show Cause Notice on merits on the ground that the activity under taken by them amounts to manufacturing of electricity since ultimate outcome of the activity is production of the electricity which is amounting production of goo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e would also gainfully refer to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of the NTPC Sail Power Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2009 (16) STR 206, the same issue wherein it was held production of electricity is considered as manufacturing activity. 6. Ld. Commissioner (AR) would submits that undoubtedly there is an agreement for management and operation of the power plant by the appellants for which have received consideration and that as per the contract there are supposed to maintain the power plant and undertake the repairs. He would submit that amount received of as consideration is of maintenance or repair services, the issue is clarified by CBEC in circular, dated 19.06.2006, which relied upon the larger Bench in the case of BSBK Pvt Ltd., 2010(25....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plant to produce electricity and transmit it to the power grid. Appellants are challenging orders on two grounds i.e. production of electricity is manufacture of goods and that contracts cannot be vivisected and amounts are not received for maintenance and repair but for running of power plant effectively. 9. On perusal of contract, we find that it indicates the amounts which are received by the appellant as consideration, are for running of the power plant and not only for maintenance and repair charges. The agreement is for operation of power plant for 24 x 7 in pursuance of such agreement, appellant prepares a detailed plan as to how to conduct maintenance of the power plant, repairs of various machinery and submits the plan to the po....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....il Power Co. Pvt Ltd.,(Supra) have clearly held so and no other contrary decision is brought to our notice. Accordingly we hold that the ratio of judgment in the Tribunal in the case of NTPC Sail Power Co. Pvt Ltd., will also help the case of the appellant. 13. As regards the reliance placed by the Ld. Commissioner(AR) in the case of BSBK Pvt Ltd., and Nagarjuna Construction Company Ltd., we find that the Appex Court in the case of L&T Limited categorically held that the works contract entered into cannot be vivisected and demand of tax can be raised under various individual services pre and post 1.06.2007 The said decision applies in its full force in this case in favour appellant. As regards the reliance placed by the Ld. Commissioner ....