TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (2) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Kumar for the Appellant. V.V. Hariharan for the Respondent. ORDER P. Karthikeyan, Technical Member. - This is an application filed by M/s. URC Constructions (P.) Ltd., Erode (URC) for waiver of pre-deposit of an amount of Rs. 1,20,49,527 being the service tax and education cess found to be due from URC for services rendered by them under the category of 'commercial or industrial construction se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of India Undertakings: (a) Nuclear Power Corporation of India, Kudangulam. (b) Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Bangalore. (c) Department of Space, Bangalore. (c Nuclear Fuel Complex, Tuticorin. The Commissioner rejected the arguments of the appellants that the civil structures constructed by them were not used for the purpose of commerce or industry and therefore the impugned activity did no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sport terminals, bridges, tunnels and dams. The recipients of construction service from the appellants were Central Government departments/Central Government Public Sector Undertakings which were not engaged primarily in commerce or industry. They worked under the Department of Atomic Energy, Department of Space etc. URC had informed the department of the impugned activity as early as on 3-9-2006 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the impugned demand and penalties. 6. On a careful consideration of the facts of the case, we find that the department has classified the impugned activity under the category 'works contract service' introduced with effect from 1-6-2007. The definition of CICS was not modified when works contract services were brought under tax net. Therefore, prima facie, the demand and penalties were wrongly....