TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 360
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g and demolition Services" along with interest and penalties. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the activity of Site Formation and Clearance Services and Construction Services. During the course of audit of the accounts of the appellant by the audit team, it was revealed that appellant has received the work order form M/s Adani Energy Ltd vide W.O. No. Proj/GAEL/Land/03 dated 20.04.2005 for providing service of Digging Excavation Back filling, sand filling, Compaction, stabilization at various CNG stations. They have subsequently given subcontract of said work to M/s S.R. Construction Karelibaug, Vadodara vide W.O. No. Proj/Aipl/Contract/05/00063 dated 15.05.05. Accordingly, M/s S.R. Construction has car....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l till 31st May 2005 and the same is not disputed by the Respondent. There is clear mention of contract number Proj/GAEL/Land/03 dated 20.04.2004 on all invoices of the appellant. He also submits that the measurement are taken on daily basis in presence of both the parties which are signed by both the parties at the day end and on the basis on which measurement summary is prepared and on the basis of which actual invoices is prepared. He submitted the said details. 3.1 He also submitted that payment is released approximately within period of 30 to 60 days from the date of invoice, hence the Appellant had prepared all invoices on time and there is delay in preparing invoices on behalf of sub-contractor which should not be termed as manipu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f contract? No work could have been done on 10.05.2005 when the work order itself was signed on 16.05.2005. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. We find that the main issue in the present case revolves around the point that whether the appellant has provided services of Site Formation and clearance, excavation and earth moving and demolition services before the levy of service tax on such services with effect from 16.06.2005 or thereafter. This issue has been dealt in detail by the Learned Commissioner in the impugned order dated 15.03.2011. The relevant paras are reproduced below: "19(ii) Now, I come to the allegation made in the show cause notice that the said assessee had....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rve that the said assessee neither in their written submissions nor during the course of the personal hearing produced any evidence to prove that the said services were provided before 16.6.2005 so as to remain outside the purview of the cut-off date of 16.6.2005, the date from which the said services were made taxable. I reproduce the relevant portion of Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 "Provided further that notwithstanding the time of receipt of payment towards the value of services, no service tax shall be payable for the part or whole of the value of services, which is attributable to services provided during the period when such services were not taxable. In view of the above, I arrive at the conclusion that the said ser....