2025 (3) TMI 845

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice Tax, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in providing taxable services of construction of retail outlets, construction of sales buildings, etc. for M/s. IOC, BPCL, HPCL, and IBP which involves installation of tank and pump dispensing units connecting them through pipelines etc. during the relevant period January 2005 to March 2008. Alleging that the services rendered by the appellant fall under the taxable category of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction' service, service tax amounting to Rs.1,47,17,911/- was proposed to be recovered along with interest and penalty. On adjudication the demand was reduced to Rs.48,81,371/- with interest and penalty imposed under Section 76, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that this Tribunal in the case of M. Srinagesh Hegde Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise [Final Order No. 20013/2024 dated 01.01.2024 in appeal No.ST/557/2010] referring to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Larsen and Toubro Ltd. (supra) case, decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 4. The Learned AR for the Revenue has reiterated the findings of the learned Commissioner. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. The short question involved in the present appeal is whether construction services rendered under various work orders, which involved supply of materials as well as labour by appellant, liable to service tax for the period January 2005 to March 2008. On-going through the sample agreement with I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the prayer made on behalf of the Revenue to re-consider and/or review the judgment of this Court in the case of Larsen and Toubro Limited (supra) is accepted, in that case, it will affect so many other assessees in whose favour the decisions have already been taken relying upon and/or following the decision of this Court in the case of Larsen and Toubro Limited (supra) and It may unsettle the law, which has been consistently followed since 2015 onwards. There are all possibilities of contradictory orders. Therefore, on the principle of stare decisis, we are of the firm view that the judgment of this Court in the case of Larsen and Toubro Limited (supra), neither needs to be revisited, nor referred to a Larger Bench of this Court as prayed....