Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Ashoka Infraways Pvt. Ltd vs Nasik on 26 February, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
APPEAL NOS: ST/634 & 635/2010
[Arising out of Orders-in-Original Nos: 17/ST/2010 & 16/ST/2010 both dated 31/08/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nashik.]
For approval and signature:
Honble Shri P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical)
Honble Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial)
1.
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
:
No
2.
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
:
Yes
3.
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
:
Seen
4.
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
:
Yes
Viva Highways Pvt. Ltd.
Ashoka Infraways Pvt. Ltd.
Appellant
Vs
Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs
Nasik
Respondent
Appearance:
Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate for the appellants Shri V.K. Agarwal, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for the respondent CORAM:
Honble Shri P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Honble Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Date of hearing: 26/02/2013 Date of decision: 26/02/2013 ORDER NO: ____________________________ Per: P.R. Chandrasekharan:
The appeals are directed against Orders-in-Original Nos: 17/ST/2010 & 16/ST/2010 both dated 31/08/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nashik.
2. Service tax demands of ` 1,28,55,229/- and ` 79,05,258/- were made against the appellants under the category of Management, Maintenance or Repair Services undertaken in respect of roads for the period 01/12/2008 to 31/03/2009. The said activity was exempted from payment of service tax vide Notification No. 24/2009-ST dated 27/07/2009. Vide Section 97(1) of Finance Act, 2012, the said exemption was given retrospective effect for the period 16/05/2005 to 26/07/2009. Consequently, the activity of repairs and maintenance of roads is not leviable to service tax during the impugned period.
3. In view of the above, the impugned orders confirming the demands are no longer sustainable in law. We accordingly, set aside the same and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief. (Dictated in Court) (Anil Choudhary) Member (Judicial) (P.R. Chandrasekharan) Member (Technical) */as 3