TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 635
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edure) Rules, 1982. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant. After hearing the learned Counsel for the applicant, we allow the miscellaneous application. 2. The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh-I, whereby the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. 3. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in providing services under the category of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Services' and entered into an agreement with service recipients for providing these services. The service recipients placed work orders with the appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....est and penalty except the penalty under Section 77 of the Act. Hence, the present appeal. 4. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the mobilisation advance is not received against the provision of any service by the appellant rather the mobilisation advance is in the nature of the unsecured advance or loan to ensure that the appellant fulfills its contractual obligations. She further submits that it is evident from the balance sheets of the relevant period wherein the appellant has recorded the mobilisation advance as unsecured loans. 5.1 She further submits that the appellant receives the mobilisation advance against the bank guarantee of equivalent amount and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvice tax at the time of its receipt. In this regard, she relies on the following cases: * Thermax Instrumentation Ltd vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Pune-I - 2016 (42) S.T.R. 19 (Tri. Mumbai) * Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I vs. Thermax Engineering Construction Co. Ltd - 2017 (12) TMI 1191 CESTAT Mumbai * SMS Infrastructure Ltd vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. & Cus., Nagpur - 2017 (47) S.T.R. 17 (Tri. - Mumbai) * M/s GJF Construction Co. Ltd vs. CCE & ST, Hyderabad - 2018 (8) TMI 323 CESTAT Hyderabad * Vishwanath Projects Ltd vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Hyderabad - 2019 (11) TMI 675 CESTAT Hyderabad * Gammon India Ltd vs. Commissioner of Service Tax-V, Mumbai - 2021 (44) G.S.T.L. 373 (Tri- Mumbai) * Bilfinger Neo S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the work in relation to the taxable service has commenced and that all the contracts, while linking such measurable stages, provide for payment of only 90% of contracted amount for the entirety of the work. The 'mobilization advance' is adjusted against the final payment due and is not linked to the work but as a pledge of the contract between the appellant and principal. It is also subject to furnishing of prescribed 'bank guarantee'; there is no connection with the performance of the contract. It is not in dispute that the 'mobilization advance', carrying interest, is granted to enable the contractor to prepare for undertaking the contracted work. The subsequent adjustment with the final payment due does not suffice to construe th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hing... That thing must be given at the moment at which the contract is concluded, because it is something given to bind the contract, and, therefore, it must come into existence at the making or conclusion of the contract. The thing given in that way must be given by the contracting party who gives it, as an earnest or token of good faith, and as a guarantee that he will fulfil his contract, and subject to the terms that if, owing to his default, the contract goes off, it will be forfeited. K, on the other hand, the contract is fulfilled, an earnest may still serve a further purpose and operate by way of part payment". In the present case the advance is like earnest money for which a Bank Guarantee is given by the appellant. It is a fact....