Case Law Details
Due to difference of opinion between the two Members of the Bench over the divisibility of the works contract in question, the matter was being referred to Third Member.
RELEVANT EXTRACTS:
The Registry is directed to place the matter before the Hon’ble President to refer the following issue to third Member:-
Whether the contracts of IOCL and BPCL with L&T can be held to be divisible and therefore service tax can be levied on the services part as held by Member (Technical) or whether the contracts between the appellants and IOCL & BPCL to be held as not divisable and therefore not liable to service tax as held by Member (Judicial)? Whether the contract between GEB and the appellants is to be held as divisible as decided by Member (Technical) or is to be held as non-divisible as held by Member (Judicial)? Whether extended period can be invoked as held by Member (Technical) in the case of contracts between the appellant and IOCL & BPCL? Whether extended period can be applied for demanding service tax in the case of contract between the appellant and GEB as held by Member (T) or not? Whether penalties have to be imposed as held by Member (Technical) or not?
