TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1000
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to be withdrawn, being not sustainable and I appropriate he amount of Rs.2,13,705/- as deposited by the party vide challans as referred above against the confirmed demand as discussed in Para 5 (ix) above (ii) I order to recover the interest at applicable rate from the party on the above demand under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. (iii) I impose penalty of Rs.60,122/- (Rs, Sixty thousand one hundred twenty two only) equal to the service tax amount liable upon the party under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of the Central! Goods 8 Services Tax Act 2017 as discussed above for suppression of facts and contravention of the provisions of the Finance Act (ibid) and rules made thereunder as discussed in Para 6 above. (iv) I refrain the penalty as proposed to be imposed upon the party under Section 77 (1) (c) (i) & (ii) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017 non- submission of information and documents respectively, being not sustainable as discussed in Para 7 above (v) I impose the penalty of Rs.10,000/- upon the party upon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Difference (4-5) S. Tax to be paid 228448 88633 134530 49705 154273 655589 2.4 Since, the appellant did not provide the copy of all Financial records/ documents as requested to them by the jurisdictional Range Officer during the course of investigation, therefore, no option had left with the jurisdictional Range Officer except to propose the demand on the basis of the 26AS as referred above. 2.5 A show cause notice dated 10.08.2018 was issued to the appellant asking him to show cause as to why : (i) An amount of Rs.64,75,519/- (Rupees sixty four lakhs seventy five thousands five hundred nineteen only) should not be treated as the value of taxable services provided by them during the Financial Years 2012-13 to 2016-17 and accordingly Service Tax amounting to Rs.8,66,577/- (Rupees eight lakhs sixty six thousand five hundred seventy seven only) as detailed in Table-1. However as per Service Tax returns the party has paid Service Tax Rs. 2,10,987/-. Thus the party is liable to pay to difference of Service Tax amount of Rs. 6,55,589/- (Rupees Six lakhs fifty five thousand five hundred eighty nine only) not paid /short paid including Education Cess, Seco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cific provision laying down with retrospective effect for granting exemption and to allow refund on Government construction during the period 01.07.012 to 29.01.2024. Government of U P enacted U P Electricity Reform Act, 199 and set up the U P Electricity Regulatory Commission as an autonomous body corporate in August 2003. DVVNL is one of the statutory bodies created under the abovementioned act. Service Tax was not payable on works contract services in terms of Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 provided to M/s Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited as the same was a Government organization. Reliance is placed on the decision of Chandigarh bench in case of Arvinda Electricals [Final Order No 62732/2018 dated 31.08.2018 in Appeal No E/60611/2017-DB] The transactions undertaken were duly reflected in the book of account and the issue involves interpretation of complex legal provisions. Therefore, the invocation of extended period of limitation is not warranted in the present case as has been held in following cases: Gujarat Intelligence Security [2010 (19) STR 270 (T- Ahmd)]; Ispat Industries Ltd [2006 (199) ELT 509 (T-Mum)];....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich inferences that M/s Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited was not a Government organization. It is also pertinent to mention here that the appellant has not submitted any evidence vide which it can be established that M/s Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited was a government organization. Now, I take up the second ground of appeal of the appellant that during the period 2012-13 and 2013-14 the appellant had provided services of Works Contract & Manpower supply and for which they were eligible to avail benefit under Notification No.30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. In this context, I find that the original adjudicating authority in Para 5(vii) & (vi) of their O-I-O discussed the same in detail and also extended the benefit of Notification No.30/2012- ST dated 20.06.2012 to the appellant. Therefore, I don't find any merit in this ground either of appeal of the appellant. Now, I take up third ground of appeal of the appellant wherein they pleaded that Demand of Service Tax has been incorrectly calculated as the appellant had not charged any Service Tax from the M/s Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, hence Service Tax was to be calculated as per c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e-in-after referred to as 'UPPCL'), U.P. Jal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (here-in-after referred to as 'UPJVVNL') and U.P. Thermal Power Generation Limited (here-in-after referred to as 'UPTPGL'). The later two companies were assigned the function of generation of electricity from hydle resources and thermal. The function of generation of UPSEB along with its assets, obligations etc. was transferred to these two companies. The third company, namely, UPPCL was assigned the function of transmission and distribution of electrical energy in the State with a further objective that the function of distribution shall further be transferred to other companies, which would be constituted only for distribution and supply. The UPSEB for all practical purposes thus ceased to function. Its duties, power, assets etc. stood transferred to the aforesaid three companies, as stated above. This happened pursuant to the U.P. Electricity Reforms Transfer Scheme, 2000 issued under Section 23 of Act, 1999 with effect from 14.01.2000. 3. There was another statutory body constituted, namely, U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (here-in-after referred to as 'UPERC'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08 Neutral Citation No. - 2008:AHC:2819-DB] clearly held as follows: "33. The term "Government company" is defined under Section 2(31) of the Act, 2003 and reads as under: "2(31) "Government company" shall have the meaning assigned to it in section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)." 34. Section 617 of 1956 Act defines a "Government company" as under: "617. Definition of "Government Company".-- For the purposes of this Act Government company means any company in which not less than fifty one per cent of the paid-up share capital is held by the Central Government, or by any State Government, or Governments, or partly by the Central Government, and partly by one or more State Governments, and includes a company which is a subsidiary of a Government Company as thus defined." ( emphasis added ) 35. The definition of 'Government company' thus extends to a company which is subsidiary of a 'Government company'. The term "subsidiary company" has been defined under Section 2(47) read with Section 4 of 1956 Act which are reproduced as under: "2(47) "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" means a subsidiary c....