Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Yash Corporation Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad )
Appeal Number : Service Tax Appeal No. 11872 of 2015-DB
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/09/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Yash Corporation Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the issue involved is of pure interpretation of legal provisions and classification of services therefore, in absence of any no mala fide intentions and suppression of facts with intention to evade payment of service tax, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked.

Facts- On the basis of information that various contractors are providing services to Gujarat State Police Housing Corporation Ltd. (M/s GSPHCL), are not paying Service tax on the taxable services provided by them to M/s GSPHCL, an enquiry was initiated against the contractors. Appellant was one such contractor to whom Work Orders were given by M/s GSPHCL for installation of electric lighting systems/D.G. Sets, etc.

The Work order received were including supply of material required for execution of the work and hence the same were in the nature of composite contract for supply of goods and services. It was alleged that the work done or services provided by appellant is classifiable as taxable service under the category of “Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services for the period upto 31.05.2007 and under the category of Works Contract Service for the period 01.06.2007 onwards and not under the Maintenance or Repair Service as classified by the appellant.

Accordingly, a detail Show Cause Notice 19.10.2012 was issued proposing to service tax demand under works contract services and Erection Commissioning or Installation Service along with interest and also for imposing penalty. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority vide impugned order confirmed the service tax demand that has been raised in the Show Cause Notice. The adjudicating authority also imposed penalty in regard to the demands confirmed. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant is now before this Tribunal.

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

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031