Samy Construction Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that sub-contractor is liable to pay service tax. Accordingly, demand of service tax on sub-contractors for normal period is sustained.
Facts- The appellant is engaged in providing various services mainly to Government of India Undertakings, Municipality, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and Corporates. It is the case of the department that the appellant did not pay proper service tax on various contracts and accordingly, service tax has been demanded with interest and penalty.
Conclusion- Held that in order to arrive at the taxable value, TDS amount is added to the Gross amount of the contract value, whereas in the Form 16A enclosed with the appeal we find that the TDS amount is deducted from the amount paid to the appellant and hence, the amount paid is itself the gross amount. Therefore, adding TDS amount once again has resulted in arriving at the inflated taxable value. TDS is always deducted from the amount payable and it is not any other consideration. Therefore, the demand on this score cannot sustain and hence, the impugned order to this extent is set aside.
Held that Construction of (a) Toilets at TNEB office (b) Construction of Security Protection wall (i) in and around LMHEP Barrage unit (ii) right side of Dam Power House, (iii) in and around of central stores and raising of compound wall of the central stores are exempt in terms of Letter No. B2/8/2004 TRU dt.10.09.2004 which is extracted supra. Similarly, Laying of underground power cable at Lower Mettur Hydro Electric Projects at Chekkanur Barrage, Nerinjipettai Barrage, and Kuthiraikkalmedu Barrage are exempt from tax in terms of Board’s Clarification in C. No. 123/5/2010-TRU dt. 24.05.2010 (F. No. 332/5/2010 – TRU) and Circular No. 62/11/2003 – ST – dated 21.8.2003 (F. No. B3/7/2003-TRU).
