TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 1124
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... penalties. 2. The facts of the case are that a search was carried out by the revenue authorities at the premises of the Appellant. During the course of search it was discovered that the Appellant was providing taxable services in the nature of erection, commissioning and installation services for the period in dispute i.e. 2009-10 to 2012-13. It is also fact on record that for the FY 2009-10 and 2010-11 the Appellant filed their periodical ST-3 returns regularly, however, for the period FY 2011-12 and 2013-14 the periodical ST-3 returns were filed belatedly. 3. As an outcome of the above referred investigation at the end of the Appellant it was observed that the Appellant has provided taxable services in the nature of erection, commissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Kumrawat, learned Advocate appeared for the Appellant. 6. Ld. Counsel has pointed out that the demand of Service Tax has been confirmed erroneously under the taxable category of erection, commissioning and installation services. He submits that it is coming up clearly from the facts recorded by Ld. Commissioner that the activity carried out by the Appellant was in the nature of "works contract" and not "erection, commissioning and installation" services as held by Ld. Commissioner. He specifically drew our attention to Paragraph 8(d) of the Order in Original dated 30.10.2014, wherein, Ld. Commissioner has mentioned the scope of work of the Appellants for the services provided to M/s. L & T Limited under PO number HZW/562424/TMV dated 24.0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. 11. We find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel for the Appellant that the scope of their services also included the supply of material. The same is supported by the facts as recorded by Ld. Commissioner in Para 8(d) of the Order in Original dated 30.10.2014 wherein it is clearly coming up that the Appellant were also required to supply the materials. Therefore, in our considered view the appropriate classification for the services provided by the Appellants would be "works contract services" and not "erection, commissioning and installation services". 12. We place reliance on the decision of coordinate bench at Chennai in case of Real Value Promo....