TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1472
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....decision on all issues involved, in view of the observations made in the said order. The impugned order has been passed as directed by the Tribunal. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellant has been registered with the Service Tax Department for providing the services of "Business Auxiliary Service", "Commissioning and Installation", "Civil Construction Service" and "Maintenance & Repair Service". Two Show cause notices under C. No.- V- 17/B'pur/SCN Cell/Service Tax/Adjn/2008/2304 dated 18.03.2009 and C. No.-V-35/B'pur/SCNCeil/ ST/Adjn/2010/9584 dated 08.10.2010 were issued to the appellant demanding service tax, including Ed. Cess and S&H Ed. Cess, amounting to Rs. 1,13,76,993/- & Rs. 6,60,11,878/- respectively. and interest amounting to Rs. 2,031/- and Rs. 48,315/-respectively for the period Oct, 2004 to 2007-08. The Notices alleged that the appellant has suppressed the value of the taxable services provided by them to M/s NTPC. In the SCN dated 8.10.2010, it has been alleged that M/s NTPC had paid higher amounts to the appellant for commissioning and installation work rendered by them, but the appellant had declared to the department lesser value amounting in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, consequently, we direct the Appellant to deposit Rs.20.00 Lakhs within a period of eight weeks from today and report compliance directly to the Ld. Commissioner. The Ld. Commissioner after recording compliance would proceed with the adjudication afresh taking into consideration the evidences on record and also the evidences that may be placed by both sides. Needless to mention a reasonable opportunity of hearing be granted to the Appellant. All issues are kept open. Appeal allowed by way of remand Stay Petition disposed of. 3.2. The impugned order has been passed as result of the directions given by the Tribunal, Kolkata. 4. The appellant submitted that they have correctly paid Service Tax and the same was shown in their half yearly returns filed with the proper officer. Hence, it is their stand that the demands confirmed in the impugned order are not sustainable. 4.1. The appellant submits that they were awarded contracts for supply, civil construction work and Erection and Commissioning of electro mechanical equipments for CW system package for Kahalgaon Super Thermal Power Project Stage-II. Three separate contracts were awarded for each of the work under separate ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had erred in two ways, first by inflating the value of installation without assigning any reason and secondly by taking additional value of Rs. 16,74,83,685/- for construction service; as a result the value of service had been inflated by more than Rs.17,91,55,124/-. As per the appellant, the factual position in this matter was that the total contract value as per agreement was of Rs.52,15,40,000/- and under no circumstances the value of service provided can exceed the total contract value. Thus, the appellant contends that the Department ought to have considered the value of 'Installation and Commissioning' service as per the contract ie Rs. 44,54,000/- as against the value of Rs. 53,32,11,439/- taken in the Show cause Notice; This fact can be verified from the bifurcation given by NTPC; no abatement had been given in the impugned order, in the case of construction services, which was legally available to them as they have not claimed any CENVAT Credit under that category. Thus, the appellant submits that the demand of service tax along with interest and penalty confirmed in the impugned order is legally not sustainable and prayed for setting aside the same. 4.3. In th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....endering the services of Installation and commissioning of Electra Mechanical Equipments and also the civil work of pump house. Thus, we agree with the submission of the appellant that the services rendered by the appellant to NTPC under contract No. No. CS-4230-133-TC-4307 dated 29.03.2004 are appropriately classifiable as 'Work Contract Service' as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (supra). As there is no demand raised and confirmed in the impugned order under the category 'Work Contract Service', we hold that the demand of service tax confirmed in the impugned order along with interest and penalties are legally not sustainable and hence we set aside the same. 7.3. The demand of service tax has been confirmed in the impugned order for the 'Installation and commissioning' service rendered by the appellant. We find that the said demand has been raised on account of an incorrect observation made by NTPC initially. We find that during the course of audit for the FY 2004-05 to 2007-08, the Department sought transaction/ledger confirmation from NTPC Limited. In its initial response, NTPC, on a prima facie basis and w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the same was shown in their half yearly returns filed with the proper officer. Thus, we hold that the demand of service tax, along with interest and penalties, confirmed in the impugned order is legally not sustainable and hence we set aside the same. 8. In the result, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the appellant with consequential relief, if any, as per law. (Operative part of Order was pronounced in Open court) ============= Document 1 Bill of Sale cum Delivery Challan cum Invoice TAX INVOICE Kurioskar Brothers Limited NTPC, Stage-II, TPS, NTPC campus, Type-Ell, Qer. No. 34, Kehelgaon, Bhaga/pur Bhegsipur Indentor :108867 National Thermal Power Corpo L Senior Manager, (CS/Th.I) "Sendlut Manager, (L/in.i)" "NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh",201301, Uttar Pradesh bước bằng Lim SAP Invoice No:5507300000/18.05.2005 Bill of Sale Ne: 5507300000/18.05.2005 Consignee :- 102454 NATIONAL THERMAL POWER COPR LTD. MATERIAL MANAGEMENT DEPTT. Kahalgaon Super Thermal KAHALGAON,813203,Bihar 1: ····· vỠbị dugni $300 ·· en số cutillas lek mộc: gate Pin mặth. 4. for future Consigandu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AUTHORISED SIGNA Kiddy LIMITES Document 3 à¤à¤¨à¤Ÿà¥€ पीसी NTPC Kas à¤à¤¨ टी पी सी लिमिटस PER miPS NTPC Limited I A Govt. of India Enlarplan ? TO, The Assistant Commissioner (Adj) Office Of the Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, 3nd Floor, Central Revenue[ Annes) Building, B C Patel Path, Patna, Bihar - 800001. Dated: 14.03.2012 . Sub: Contract No CS-4230-133-2-SC-COA-4307 Dated 29.03.2004 Ref: your letter No. V-(15)52-ST/Adjn/2010 dtd. 23.11.2011. Dear Sur, In continuation to our earlier Letter by DGM(F&A)dated 24.11.2011 with regard to the inquiry conducted for Contract No. CS-4230-133-2-5C-COA-4307 dated 29.03.2004, we may inform you that on conducting the re-verification of the correct position as requested by M/s Kirloskär Brothers Ltd., we state that the Letter of Acceptance (LOA) amount shown in the Letter dated 24.11.2011 amounting to Rs. 52, 15,40,000/- is correct however the said amount was not only for installation service but also for the construction service. We further certify that out of the said total amount, ....