2024 (1) TMI 639

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs.1,20,99,300/- (Rs. One Crore Twenty Lacs Ninety Nine Thousand and Three Hundred only) against the party i.e. M/s Meatek Food Machineries India (P) Ltd. A-2/3, Dewa Road, Chinhat Industrial Road, Chinhat Lucknow-227105. (ii) I also order to the party to pay appropriate amount of interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. (iii)I impose penalty of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand only) under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. (iv) I also impose penalty of Rs.1,20,99,300/- (Rs. One Crore Twenty Lacs Ninety Nine Thousand and Three Hundred only) against the party under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2.1 Respondent has undertaken the work of Design & Engineering, Land & Site Development & Civil works etc. for construction of sl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the impugned order along with submissions made in appeal and during the course of argument. 4.2 For deciding against the Revenue Commissioner (Appeals) has in his order observed as follows:- "6. I have gone through the case record. It is apparent from the record that the appellant constructed the Slaughterhouse for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. Regulation of Slaughter house is one of the mandated functions of local bodies under the Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution envisaged under article 243W of the Constitution. Thus, there is no ground to say that the said slaughter house has been established by KMC for commerce or industry. Therefore, the said service of construction of slaughterhouse for KMC is covered under para 12(a) of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In case of Ganpati Mega Builders (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2021 (55) (GSTL) 161 (T-All)] Allahabad Bench has held as follows: "13. From above citation we find that undisputedly the appellant have rendered construction service to the Mandi Samiti, which is a statutory authority. We, further find that the services provided to Mandi Samiti for construction services in the market yard are not commercial in nature as held by a Coordinated Bench of this Tribunal in Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti v. Commissioner of C. Ex & S.T., Jaipur, 2017 (4) G.S.T.L. 346 (Tri. - Del.). Wherein Paras 10 & 11 it is held herein with the introduction of Negative List Regime of Taxation w.e.f. from 1st July, 2012, the Mandi Parishad is excluded from tax liability. Under Sec....