Topaz Service Corporation Vs Commissioner of Central Goods Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that the taxable category “Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services” could only cover pure service contracts. Thus, composite contracts involving supply of both goods and services could not have been taxed under the said category.
Facts-
The appellant is engaged in the activity of supply, fixing, laying of wire cables, pipe and telephone connections for various Government departments including inter-alia Central Public Works Department (CPWD) and Public Works Department (PWD).
On investigation, it appeared that the appellant was not paying service tax on the activity of laying of cables/wires. It appeared that the appellant believed that their activity would be chargeable to VAT not Service Tax, and was paying VAT. The Department formed an opinion that the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax in terms of Circular No. 123/5/2010-TRU.
On completion of investigations, SCN dated 13.04.2012 invoking extended period of limitation was issued to the appellant demanding Service Tax amounting to Rs.1,17,48,282/- u/s. 73(1); interest u/s. 75 and imposition of penalty under Section 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
The demand was confirmed by the Commissioner. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
