2023 (3) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the records of the Appellant, it was found that appellant have provided services in respect of Civil Work for terminal of HPCL as a sub-contractor of M/s Bridge and Roof Co. (India) Ltd. The appellant had stated in their letter dated 17.07.2009 that they had worked as sub-contractor and the principal contractor has paid the Service tax on such work and they were not liable for payment of service tax on such civil work carried out by them as subcontractor. Further M/s Bridge and Roof Co. (India) Ltd. had also informed vide letter dated 16.06.2010 that they have paid the service tax on such Civil Works for terminal of HPCL. However revenue contended that the Board vide Circular No. 96/7/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007 had clarified that sub-contra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tractor. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in case of Melange Developers Pvt. Ltd. - 2019-VIL-352-CESTAT-DEL-ST held that the sub-contractor also need to pay Service tax in their individual capacity. However, the above verdict was delivered in 2019 after recording contrary views of the different benches of tribunal. The issue relates to bona fide interpretation of law and therefore, the entire demand in the present case is time barred. He placed reliance on the following judgments: • M/s J S Kataria -2022-VIL-878-CESTAT-AHM-ST. • Vinoth Shipping Services -2021-VIL -397-CESTAT-AHE-ST • HPR Interior - 2020-VIL-281-CESTAT-DEL-ST • CST Vs. Simplex Infrastructure -2022-VIL-984-CESTAT-DEL-ST. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....struction service. However, such composite contracts are taxable only w.e.f. 1-6-2007 under Works Contract service. Prior to 1-6-2007 or w.e.f. 1-6-2007, only those contracts which are purely for services, are taxable under Commercial or Industrial Construction service. The Tribunal in this matter also rely upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.). Following the above decision, we are of the considered opinion that the demand of service tax under commercial or industrial construction service in the present matter also not sustainable. 5.2 On limitation also we agree with the argument of Ld. Counsel. We find that during the relevant period there were various Circulars....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sion in the case of OIKOS v. CCE, Bangalore - III reported in 2007 (5) S.T.R. 229 (Tri.-Bang.) after taking note of the Board's Circular dated 7-10-1998 as also Delhi Commissionerate Trade Notice No. 53/CE (ST)/97, dated 4-9-1997, Tribunal held that as the main service provider has discharged the tax liability, no separate Service Tax can be confirmed against the sub-contractor. To the similar effect the Tribunal decision in the case of Viral Builders v. CCE, Surat reported in 2011 (21) S.T.R. 457 (Tri.-Ahmd.) observed that service stands provided only once and as such tax is not payable twice for the same service. Further in the case of Sunil Hi-Tech Engineers Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur reported in 2010 (17) S.T.R. 121 (Tri.-Mumbai), the service ....