2025 (3) TMI 1349

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....plex' Service is liable to pay service tax for the entire amount for the period from October 2005 to April 2007. Today, the appellant had submitted a Miscellaneous Application for inclusion of additional ground and submits that as per the law laid down by the apex court in the case of CCE & Cus., Kerala vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. reported in 2015 (39) STR 913 (SC), the classification of 'Construction of Residential Complex Service' as claimed by the appellant and assessed by the respondent is unsustainable and the activity is falling under the category of 'works contract service' and appellant is not liable to pay service tax for the relevant period since service tax for the 'works contract service' is not liable to service tax prior to 01.06....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ounsel submits that the above matter as similar to the present appeal, the appellant has not raised the issue whether the activities carried out by the appellant are in the nature of works contract service on which no service tax is payable. After considering the provisions, it is held that: "20. It, therefore, follows that if the appellant has to urge any ground that has not been set forth in the memorandum of appeal, the appellant has to take leave of the Tribunal to urge or be heard on such additional ground. However, the Tribunal in deciding the appeal shall not be confined to the grounds set forth in the memorandum of appeal or those taken by leave of the Tribunal but it would be necessary for the Tribunal, in such a situation, to af....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....#8223; service and had filed the service tax returns also under "construction of complex‟ service, it would not be open to the appellant to contend that the services should appropriately be classified under works contract service. This is what has also been contended by the learned authorised representative for the department. This submission cannot be accepted. Mere registration under a particular category and filing service tax returns under the said category would not mean that the appellant has provided service under that category, for in each case it has to be actually ascertained, if a dispute is raised, under which particular category the service would fall. If the service actually falls under works contract service, then mere ....