Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Icomm Tele Ltd vs Cce&St-Iii, Hyderabad on 1 September, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REGIONAL BENCH AT HYDERABAD Bench DB Court I Appeal No.ST/22793/2014 Application No.ST/Stay/23295/2014 (Arising out of Order-in-original No.HYD-EXCUS-003-COM-15-14-15 dt. 16/06/2014 passed by CC,CE and ST, Hyderabad) For approval and signature: Honble Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member(Judicial) Honble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member(Technical) 1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see 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 Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Order? 4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? M/s. ICOMM Tele Ltd. ..Appellant(s) Vs. CCE&ST-III, Hyderabad ..Respondent(s)
Appearance Shri P. Dwarakanath, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Gunaranjan, Superintendent(AR) for the respondent.
Coram:
Honble Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member(Judicial) Honble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member(Technical) Date of Hearing:01/09/2016 Date of decision:01/09/2016 FINAL ORDER No._______________________ [Order per: Madhu Mohan Damodhar] The Appellant is engaged in providing various taxable services to M/s. Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project and M/s. Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) in connection with setting up of water supply / drainage infrastructure involving laying of underground pipelines and other works. The appellants did not pay any service tax for the said activities as they entertained bona fide belief that these works are not meant for commerce but are meant for the purposes of general public utility. With respect to BWSSB contracts, it is submitted that the contracts were terminated by BWSSB and the Bank guarantee furnished was also forfeited and hence no service tax was payable.
2. A show cause notice was issued demanding service tax amounting to Rs. 1,89,90,444/- along with interest and for imposition of penalty. After due process of law, vide Order-in-Original dated 16/06/2014, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and interest and imposed penalties. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal.
3. The appeal came up today for hearing on the application for stay. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for appellant Sh. P. Dwarakanath submitted that the issue in dispute is now been set to rest by the decision of the Tribunal Larger Bench in the case of Lanco Infra tech Ltd., [2015 (038) STR 0709 (Tri-L.B.)].
4. Therefore with the consent of both sides, the matter was taken up for final disposal. Following the judgment laid in Lanco Infra Tech Ltd., case, this Bench has in the case of M/s Ayyappa Infra Projects Pvt Ltd., (Final order No. A/30560-30561/2016 dated 21.06.2016) on identical issue remanded the matter to adjudicating authority. Therefore, in the light of the decision laid in Lanco Infra Tech Ltd. (supra) as well as the decision of this Tribunal in the above stated Final Order, we remand this matter to the adjudicating authority.
5. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand. Stay application is disposed accordingly. (Operative part of this order was pronounced in court on conclusion of the hearing) MADHU MOHAN DAMODHAR MEMBER(TECHNICAL) SULEKHA BEEVI C.S. MEMBER(JUDICIAL) Raja.
3