Notification No. 12/2003-S.T not specifies that goods have to necessarily be supplied under invoices

N R Engineering & Contractors Vs C.S.T. -Service Tax (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

CESTAT held that condition in Notification No. 12/2003-ST is only production of documentary proof indicating value of the goods and materials supplied. This does not in any manner mean that the goods have to necessarily be supplied under invoices.

In the present matter Learned Commissioner (Appeals) by referring the invoice No RA 10 dated 10.03.2005 concluded that the nature of work indicated is not in the nature of sale of any material. The rate is charged on cubic meter/ square meter. This shows that the description of work shown, are in the nature of service rendered and not material. The Appellant are not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST as they could not provide any evidence regarding sale of material used in providing construction service. Whereas appellant in their submission contended that only by referring the invoice No. 10 dated 10.03.2005. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) conveniently ignored the entire invoice and has picked up the part of the invoice. As per the appellant, the said invoice also revealed the cost of material and cost of labour separately.

We are of the considered view that the condition in the Notification is only production of documentary proof indicating the value of the goods and materials supplied. This does not in any manner mean that the goods have to necessarily be supplied under invoices. Therefore, evidence was produced before the authority and the sufficiency of it has to be examined. If the appellant is able to show from the documents i.e. contract read with other documents including its R.A. Bills (Running Account Bills) ,books of accounts and returns filed with the Sales Tax Authorities, the value of goods sold and supplied to the satisfaction of the authorities, it would be compliance with the condition provided in Notification No. 12/2003-S.T., dated 20 June, 2003. In the peculiar facts of this case, it would be appropriate to set aside, and we hereby set aside the impugned order of Learned Commissioner (Appeals) and remand the matter to the Original authority to reconsider the impugned matter afresh and pass order after permitting the appellant to lead documentary evidence to establish its claim with regard to the value of goods and materials supplied in execution of its contracts for construction services for availing of the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T., dated 20 June, 2003.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT AHMEDABAD ORDER

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.