TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1312
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....found by the department that the Appellant are not registered with the department. Information was sought from the Appellant and after considering the information supplied by the Appellant and in view of the statement dated 24.09.2010 of the Appellant, the demand of service tax under the category of 'Construction of Residential Complex Services' for the period from 10.09.2004 to 31.03.2010 was raised with regard to following seven work orders: 1) Construction of 54 No. HIG/MIG (Super Flats) in 475 Acres Scheme (Pocket-B) at Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Ludhiana 2) Construction of 30 No. MIG Flats at Sukhdev Enclave, Block-C, Ludhiana (Super Flats) in 475 Acres Scheme 3) Construction of 30 No. MIG Flats at Sukhdev Enclave, Block-D, Ludhiana (Super Flats) in 475 Acres Scheme 4) Construction of 144 No. Two Rooms Flats four storied in Sector 40, Samrala road, Ludhiana 5) Construction of 400 Dwelling Units, Village Jamalpur, Group-III, JNNURAM Scheme DPR-I, Giaspura, Group-IV, Ludhiana 6) Construction of 35 No. Residential House of Irrigation Department at Canal Colony, Dugri Road, Phase-I, Ludhiana 7) Construction of 400 Dwe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....' as the same was not in existence even prior to 01.06.2007. She also submits that since the new species to be taxed, was created on 01.06.2007, it cannot be taxed under the head of 'Construction of Residential Complex Services' either prior to introduction of the said tax or even after the introduction. 4.4 She further submits that this issue is no more res integra as this Tribunal in the case of M/s Passi Construction vs. CCE & ST, Ludhiana vide Final Order No. 60515/2023 dated 20.10.2023, involving the similar facts, has set aside the demand of service tax and penalties. She also relies on the following decisions wherein the Tribunal, after following the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of CE & Cus., Kerala vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd - 2015 (39) STR 913 (SC), has settled the identical issue: * Bajrang Lal Gupta vs. CCE, Delhi-III - (2023) 9 Centax 199 (Tri. Chan.) * EMAAR MGF Construction Pvt Ltd vs. CCE, New Delhi - 2020 (34) GSTL 509 (Tri. Del.) 5. On the other hand, Mr. Shantanu Kumar Meena, the learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order and submits that the department though h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iter and not to composite works contracts. This is clear from the very language of Section 65(105) which defines "taxable service" as "any service provided". All the services referred to in the said sub-clauses are service contracts simpliciter without any other element in them, such as for example, a service contract which is a commissioning and installation, or erection, commissioning and installation contract. Further, under Section 67, as has been pointed out above, the value of a taxable service is the gross amount charged by the service provider for such service rendered by him. This would unmistakably show that what is referred to in the charging provision is the taxation of service contracts simpliciter and not composite works contracts, such as are contained on the facts of the present cases. It will also be noticed that no attempt to remove the non-service elements from the composite works contracts has been made by any of the aforesaid Sections by deducting from the gross value of the works contract the value of property in goods transferred in the execution of a works contract." 8. Further, we find that the works contract service has been introduced w.e.f. 01.06.2007....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cited supra, we find that the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of CCE vs. Larsen & Toubro Limited (supra) has settled the issue relating to works contract service which includes supply of material and labour for consideration and the same is taxable only from 01.06.2007. 17. Further, we find that even for the period after 01.06.2007, various decisions of the Tribunal have consistently held that the composite contract or works contract service even after 01.06.2007 cannot be taxed under Construction of Complex Service under Section 65 (105) (zzh) read with Section 65 (30a) of the Finance Act, 1994. 18. ...... 19. Further, we find that in the case of Prime Developers Limited vs. CCE [2018-TIOL-2867-CESTAT-MAD.], the Division Bench of Chennai Tribunal in identical circumstances has held as under:- "In the light of the discussions, findings and conclusions above and in particular, relying on the ratios of the case laws cited supra, we hold as under:- a. The services provided by the appellant in respect of the projects executed by them for the period prior to 1.6.2007 being in the nature of composite works contract cannot be brought within the....