TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 998
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IO dated 30.11.2011 Dropped entire demand Department appeal [ST/38 0/2012 - CU(DB)] Final Order No. 5504055041/2 017 dated 11.07.20 17 Demand in respect of Internal Development Works & Construct ion of boys hostel dropped. Demand in respect of remaining activity remanded back* Impugned OIO dated 04.03.2020 Demand re- confirmed on 1st 3 activities of the Appellant amounting to Rs. 1,36,92,357 falling under 1st SCN. 05.03.2 010 to 30.09.2 010 SCN dated 27.06 .2011 18,56,080 Tax demand on 4th& 5th services i.e., Internal Development Work & Construction of boys hostel OIO dated 30.11.2012 Dropped entire demand Department appeal [ST/56 952/20 13- CU(DB)] 01.10.2 010 to 30.09.2 011 SCN dated 23.04 .2011 53,00,419 ST/51032/ 2020 01.10.2 011 to 30.06.2 012 SCN dated 22.04 .2013 63,60,502 Tax demand on 2nd, 5th, &6th service (i.e., c/o 146 houses, hockey pavilion &boys hostel) Impugned OIO dated 25.06.2020 Demand in respect of Construction of boys hostel & hockey pavilion dropped. Demand in respect of c/o 146 houses confirmed - Rs. 3,13,784/- Appeal filed by Assessee  ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... authority below has still denied the classification under Works Contract Service. This is in total disregard and utter violation of this tribunals final order dated 11.07.2017. The tribunal had categorically directed to re-adjudicate in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Kerala and Ors. Vs Larsen and Toubro Ltd and Ors. reported as 2015(39) STR 913 Supreme Court. Ld. Chartered Accountant further submitted, that according to the said decision no service tax can be imposed prior to 1.06.2007 on the composite services while for the period after 01.06.2007, the demand of construction of complex service has to be classified under Works Contract Service, for the demand to be confirmed. Since all the show cause notices in the present appeal have proposed demand under service simpliciter of 'Construction of Complex Service' 'instead of Work Contract Service', the demand has wrongly been confirmed. 3.1 With respect to the service tax collected from GNIDA, the service recipient of the appellant it is submitted that the amount was deposited, under protest, with government ex-chequer. However, on being held that the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for GNIDA, and ii. Internal development work for Omicron (II) Part A including roads, drinking water, sewerage system, water supply system, cattle, etc. 2) Construction of boys hostel in Gautam Budh University Greater Noida. The demand for service tax was made under the category of construction of complex falling within section 65 (30a) of the Finance Act 1994 read with section 65(91a) ibid. The original adjudicating authority vide the Orders-in-Original as mentioned above set aside the demand for service tax entirely for the following reasons: i) The respondent has undertaken construction of single storey houses in three different localities. The adjudicating authority has taken the view that these will not be covered within the definition of construction of complex for the reason that in one block of land only one single story. house has been constructed. For the activity to fall within the construction of complex service, a single building having at least 13 residential units should be constructed. He has also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Macro Marble Projects ltd. 2008 (12) STR 603 (SC) which has been upheld by the Hon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l be payable on construction of boys hostel. 7. The department is not in appeal against the dropping of demand on said two grounds. Thus the only issue is about the construction of residential houses which tribunal has already held to be the composite service. The adjudicating authority has still confirmed the demand under Construction of Complex Service. The authority was directed to decide afresh in terms of decision in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, reported as (2014) 1 SCC 708. In said case the hon'ble Supreme Court stated : - "In our opinion, the term "works contract" in Article 366(29A)(b) is amply wide and cannot be confined to a particular understanding of the term or to a particular form. The term encompasses a wide range and many varieties of contract. Parliament had such wide meaning of "works contract" in its view at the time of the Forty-sixth Amendment. The object of insertion of clause (29-A) in Article 366 was to enlarge the scope of the expression "tax on sale or purchase of goods" and overcome Gannon Dunkerley (1) [State of Madras v. Gannon Dunkerley and Co. (Madras) Ltd., AIR 1958 SC 560 : 1959 SCR 379]. Seen thus, even if in ....