TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 151
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uction at industrial units in and around Guwahati. 2. The Officers of the Anti-Evasion Unit of the Guwahati Commissionerate initiated an investigation against the appellant and upon completion of the investigation, issued a Show Cause Notice dated 12.04.2013 to the appellant inter alia demanding Service Tax of Rs.2,20,40,827/- (including cesses) under the category of 'commercial or industrial construction service' for the period from 01.10.2007 to 30.09.2012. The Notice alleged that the appellant had undertaken 'commercial or industrial construction service' to various clients as per the Work Orders received by them and that the Work Orders did not indicate that any material was supplied by the appellant. Accordingly, it was alleged that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ried out by them along with materials; this is evident from the Work Orders enclosed with the Show Cause Notice. The appellant submits that the adjudicating authority, after verification of the Work Orders allowed the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 in respect of some of the Work Orders and rejected the benefit in respect of the remaining Work Orders. The Appellant submits that they have evidence on record to show that they have used 'materials' while executing all the Work Orders. Thus, they submitted that if the issue is remanded back to the adjudicating authority, they will be able to prove the usage of 'materials' in all the Work Orders. Accordingly, the appellant has prayed for setting aside th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cial or industrial construction service' and availed the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006. The claim of the appellant is that they have executed all the Work Orders along with materials and hence, they are eligible for the benefit of the Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006. 8.1. From the submissions made by the appellant in their Grounds of Appeal, we observe that the adjudicating authority allowed the benefit of the Notification01/2006-S.T.dated 01.03.2006 in respect of some of the Work Orders and rejected the benefit in respect of the Work Orders pertaining to the below mentioned units: Sl. No. Service Recipient 1 M/s. Emami Limited 2 M/s. CG Foods 3 M/s. IVRCL Infrastructure & Projects Ltd. 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Work Orders (where the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 was not extended). 8.5. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the demands confirmed in the impugned order under the category of 'Commercial or industrial construction service' and remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for the purpose of verification of usage of materials in respect of all the Work Orders (where the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 was not extended) and examine the eligibility of the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 in respect of those Work Orders as well. The appellant is directed to produce all the documents evidencing that materials have been used in the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....demands of service tax on these categories. Accordingly, we uphold the demands of service tax along with interest confirmed under these categories. Since there is no evidence brought on record to establish suppression of facts with intention to evade payment of tax in respect of these demands, we hold that no penalty imposable on the appellant with respect to these confirmed demands. 11. In the result, we pass the following order : - (i) We set aside the demands confirmed in the impugned order and remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for the purpose of verification of usage of materials in respect of all the Work Orders (where the benefit of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 was not extended) so as to decide ....