Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Raigad vs Indian Oil Tanking Ltd on 3 January, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO.1(LB) APPEAL NO.ST/275/06 (Arising out of Order-in- Appeal No. AT/440/RGD/2006 dtd. 13.7.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Raigad ) For approval and signature: Honble Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President Honble K.K.Agarwal, Member(Technical) Honble A.K.Srivastava, Member(Technical) ============================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : seen
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes
authorities?
============================================================= Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad :
Appellant VS Indian Oil Tanking Ltd. Respondent Appearance Shri K.M.Mondal, Consultant for Appellant Shri V.Sridharan, advocate with Sujit Kotiyan, C.A. for the respondents CORAM:
Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President Mr.K.K.Agarwal, Member(Technical) Mr.A.K.Srivastava, Member(Technical) Date of decision: 03/01/08 ORDER NO.
Per : Jyoti Balasundaram This Larger Bench was constituted to resolve the conflict between the decisions of the Tribunal. In CCE vs Daelim Industrial Co..Ltd. [2004(170)E.L.T. A.181(SC), (the Supreme Court upheld the Tribunals order reported in 2003(155)ELT 457, wherein it was held that a work contract cannot be vivisected and part of it subjected to Service tax) and judgement of the Tribunal in Larsen & Toubro Ltd. vs CCE [2004(60)RLT 505] following the Daelim Industrial Co.Ltd. decision, on the one hand, and the decision in CCE, Raipur vs BSBK P.Ltd. [2007(5)STR 124] , wherein it was held by the Tribunal in the case of similar contracts that the turnkey project contract was divisible and that the services rendered by the assesses/respondents were covered under the category of consulting engineer and hence liable to service tax.
3. We note that by order dated 30.11.2007, in SLP 817/2007, the Apex Court has set aside the Tribunals order in the case of BSBK (P)Ltd. cited supra on the ground that it was an ex-parte order and remanded the case to the Tribunal and directed the parties to appear before the Tribunal on 18.1.2008. Therefore, as of today, no conflict exists by way of varying or divergent orders of the Tribunal. Hence, no orders are called for by a Larger Bench on the issue referred to it. The case is sent back for fresh decision to Division Bench which shall list the matter for hearing after issuing notice.
K.K.Agarwal Member(Technical) Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram Vice President A.K.Srivastava Member(Technical) pv 2