2021 (8) TMI 294

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt by letter dated 08 May, 2014 submitted copies of their balance sheet along with income tax returns, copy of contracts/agreements entered for the period 2009-10 to 2012-13. The details submitted are as follows :- S. No. Financial Year Turnover Achieved Work Retates to Remarks 1. 2009-10 Rs. 20,20,14,266.74 JNNURM Yojna under Agra Development Authority Exempt from Service Tax Vide Notification No. 28/2010 dated 22.06.2010 2. 2010-11 Rs. 18,39,15,805.94 JNNURM Yojna under Agra Development Authority Exempt from Service Tax Vide Notification No. 28/2010 dated 22.06.2010 3. 2011-12 Rs. 6,42,44,503.21 JNNURM Yojna under Agra Development Authority Exempt from Service Tax Vide Notification No. 28/2010 dated 22.06.2010 4. 2012-13   1.JNNURN yojna Work Amount to Rs. 1,42,35,508.37   JNNURM Yojna under Agra Development Authority   Exempt from Service Tax Vide clause no. 13(b) Notification no. 25/2012 dated 20.06.2012   2.M/s Sintex limited work amount to Rs. 2,40,33,232.75   M/s Sintex Industries Ltd. Luckow   Service Tax of Rs. 9,60,643/- is paid on 7th May 20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x on construction services provided to M/s Uncle Builders during the financial year 2009-10 & 2010-11. 7. It further appeared to Revenue that the gross receipts for various contracts executed by the appellant are not individually reflected in their balance sheets and thus Revenue adopted the value as per Form 26AS. It was further observed that appellant failed to submit any documents/records so as to arrive at the value of goods involved in works contract. Accordingly, tax liability was calculated under works contract composition scheme, as amended, and for the period starting from 01 July, 2012 the service tax liability was calculated in terms of Rule 2A (ii) of Service Tax Determination of Value Rules, 2006. Accordingly, tax liability including cess was calculated of Rs. 1,73,08,890/- 8. It was further alleged in the SCN dated 21 October, 2014, that the appellant have failed to disclose true material facts and have contravened the provisions of the Act and Rules, to evade payment of service tax. Accordingly, extended period of limitation was invoked under proviso of 73(1) of the Act for raising demand for the period 2009-10 to 2013-14. The amount of Rs. 26,55,67,195/- was p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f appellant is material and not of ADA. 11 The learned counsel assailed the findings of the Commissioner stated that for the advance amount received before July, 2010 for construction of residential houses under JNNURM & 'Rajiv Awaas Yojana', the work was done after July, 2010 and exempted as per Notification No. 30/2010 dated 28 June, 2010. Further, for the work relating to JNNURM have been executed for the Uttar Pradesh Government, which is providing shelter and home to the poor people at nominal rental basis and thus falls under the definition of construction for personal use of the Government or government authority. Further, this nowhere falls under commercial purpose as held by this Tribunal in the case of CCE & ST, Allahabad V/s Ganesh Yadav reported in 2017  (6) G.S.T.L. 428 (Tri.All.) wherein this Tribunal referring to Larger Bench ruling in the case of M/s Lanco Infratech Ltd. V/s CC. CE & ST -(2015) 38 S.T.R. 709 (Tri.-LB) have held that such activity which was not taxable prior to 01 June, 2007 under the category of commercial and industrial construction, continues to be non taxable under the works contract category from 01 June, 2007, when works contract was in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case of M/s Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti V/s CCE & ST, Jaipur-I & II-2017 (4) GSTL 346. In Para 10 of the judgement reference to negative list under Section 66 of the Finance Act w.e.f. 01 July 2012, which also covers services relating to agriculture produce and services by Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee/Board. Further this Tribunal in Para 11 of the judgement have held that Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee is excluded from tax liability under the service tax provisions as Clause (d) of Section 66(D) provides exemption for services provided to agriculture or agricultural produce by way of agricultural operations directly related to production of any agricultural produce, supply of farm labour, processes carried out at an agricultural farm, renting or leasing of agro machinery or vacant land, with or without structure, loading, unloading, packing, storage or warehousing of agricultural produce, agricultural extension services, services by any Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee or Board. Reference was also made by this Tribunal to the Education Guide dated 20 June, 2012 wherein Para 4.4.9 of the guide, read with Para 4.4.11-that APMCs or Boards are set up under th....