AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 98
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication thereby confirming the demand in the impugned Show Cause Notice (common) dated 28.09.2010. 2. The facts relevant for the present purpose are that the appellants is a Delhi based company having centralised registered since 06.02.2007 under Site Formation and Clearance, Excavation and Earth Moving and Demolishing Services w.e.f. 30.09.2007. The appellant got included few more services as that of goods transport operators, business auxiliary service, cargo handling service and mining service. A reference was received against the appellant in furtherance whereof investigation against it were started. It was found that the appellant were providing services to M/s Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Ltd. (RSMML in short) which is the acti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the State Government to clear that water so as to complete mining activities in the said mine and as such the activity of depressurising the impugned water aquifer is as much a mining activity as was awarded to appellant under the contract dated 27.01.2003 and cannot be categorised as site clearance as defined under Section 65 (25a). The Adjudicating Authority has failed to appreciate that the clearing of said water aquifer is an activity in furtherance of ongoing mining. Hence, the Order is liable to be set aside. 5. While justifying the impugned order, it is impressed upon that the agreement of appellant itself has a clause that the rate schedule therein is inclusive of service tax and all other applicable taxes, duties, insurances, r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....week's time was provided to him to produce the contract, if any, about the asserted mining activity. The copies of contract have been provided to the registry and are accordingly placed on record. 7. Perusal of these arguments shows that there has been an agreement dated 27.01.2003 between the appellant as contracted and RSMML as the owner of the mines for removal of overburden and raising of saleable demand from Kasnau Mines. Clause 2.1.5 of the agreement shows that the area bound by laws/ the impugned agreement is Kasnau-Mata Sukh Mines, being the mine falling in the boundary of both the villages. Perusal of Clause 4.2.1 which is about the description of work perusal makes it clear that the agreement as was executed between the parties i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd earthmoving and demolition and such other similar activities;' The settled law of interpretation is described in the maxim "Interpretare et concordare leges legibus, est optimus interpretendi modus - which means to interpret and in such a way as to harmonize law with laws, is the best mode of interpretation" Applying this principle to the above definition makes it abundantly clear that any activity which is done to prepare a site for a particular purpose will fall under the category of services of clearance which means the activity to fall under the category has to be prior than the activity for which it is meant. 9. In the present case, it is apparent that appellant was already awarded work of mining activity i.e. of mining lignite ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....date such activities being part of mining operations itself are not subject to service tax and as such no service tax is leviable on such activities prior to the said date. 11. Now coming to the activities for the period beyond 01.06.2007 till 31.03.2008, it is observed that though the activities of appellant are no doubt the mining activities but it is observed from the impugned Show Cause Notice that the same has not been so alleged. In Show Cause Notice, the Department has alleged the said activity as that of site clearance. In such circumstances, the principle is well settled that the classification of taxable service which is not alleged in the Show Cause Notice cannot be concluded to support levy of tax. The Adjudication Authority vi....