TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1342
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing that of erection, commissioning or installation services. It is the case of the revenue that it was gathered from its intelligence that the appellant had wrongly availed the benefit of abatement under Notification No. 1/2006 dated 01.03.2006 and upon further verification of their ST-3 returns, they appear to have noticed various discrepancies as depicted under paragraph 2.0 of the Order in Original ('OIO' for short). There, reference is made to four work orders and the job description has also been mentioned, against each of the work order. 2. It appears that subsequently, statement of various employees of the assessee company were recorded and consequently, a show cause notice dated 23.04.2012 was issued proposing to demand service ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....O, relevant portion of one of the contracts has been reproduced and specifically at clause 3.1, it is clearly mentioned that the rates quoted were for the work including material cost, other than those materials supplied by the contractor. Further, at paragraph 6.4 of the OIO, the original authority categorically records that all the other three contracts entered into with NPCIL were almost identical, from where it was clear to him that supply materials was also involved and the assessee had charged NPCIL for the material supplied as well as for the labour work and hence, the authority has drawn a conclusion that the contracts in question were not a pure labour contract. 6. The original authority refers to the scope of contracts at para 7.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ligible for abatement in the respect of the value of electrical equipment systems supplied by it. Finally, after distinguishing the judicial precedents, vide OIO confirms the demands that were proposed in the SCN. 8. It is against the said OIO that the present appeal has been filed before this Forum. 9. We have heard Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri M. Ambe, Deputy Commissioner and Shri Harendra Singh Pal, Ld. Asst. Commissioner, for the Respondent revenue. We have perused the documents placed on record and we have also gone through the decisions / orders relied upon during the course of arguments. 10. After hearing the rival contentions, we find that the only issue that arises for our consideration is, "....