2023 (3) TMI 1275

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2016 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)- I Service Tax, New Delhi [the Commissioner (Appeals)] confirming the order dated 18.02.2016 passed by the Additional Commissioner. 2. M/s Alcatal Portugal SA (subsequently known as M/s Thales Portugal SA and now known as GTSPT-Ground Transportation Systems Portugal S.A.) had been set up in accordance with the permission granted by a letter dated 27.06.2021 issued by Exchange Control Department of the Reserve Bank of India [RBI] for the purpose of executing the contract entered into with the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation [DMRC]. It, along with M/s Alstom Transport S.A., M/s Alstom Transport Ltd. (India) and Sumitomo Corporation, entered into a consortium for execution of the turnkey contract with....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... two show cause notices involved in this appeal are dated 23.10.2012 and 21.04.2014 and following allegations have been made against the appellant: (i) The services provided to DMRC with respect to Cost Centre A (Preliminaries and General Requirements) and Cost Centre B (Detailed Design) is classifiable under the taxable category of 'consulting engineer service' ; and (ii) The services provided by the appellant to DMRC with respect to Cost Centre D (Installation and Site Testing) and Cost Centre E (System Acceptance Test and Integrated Testing & Commissioning) is classifiable under the taxable category of 'erection, commissioning or installation services'. 5. The demand proposed in show cause notices was confirmed by or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... S.A. (now Known as M/s Thales Portugal SA) V/s CST, Delhi [2017 (5) TMI 1088-CESTAT, New Delhi] 8. Shri Rajeev Kapoor, learned authorized representative appearing for the Department, however, supported the impugned order and submitted that it does not call for any interference in this appeal. 9. It is seen that for the period prior to 01.07.12, the service provided by the appellant would be covered within the exclusion clause of the definition of works contract service since the service provided by the appellant to DMRC is with respect to metro (which is covered within the purview of Railways). This issue was also decided in favour of the appellant in the aforesaid two decisions in the appellant's own case. The relevant portion of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....43) STR 547 (Tribunal-Delhi) and in case of Kumagai Skanska HCC Itochou Group Vs. CST, Delhi Final Order No.53833/2015 dated 28.12.2015. As such, works contract service' provided to Indian Railways as well as DMRC are excluded for tax liability 10. In view of the above discussions and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (supra), the impugned orders confirming service tax liability on the appellants/assessees are legally not sustainable. Accordingly, the same are set aside. The appeals by the appellants/assessees are allowed." 10. For the period post 30.06.2012, the service rendered by the appellant would be covered under Serial No. 14 of the Exemption Notification dated 20.06.2012. ....