Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M. Ramakrishna Reddy, Civil ... vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... on 25 January, 2018
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REGIONAL BENCH AT HYDERABAD Division Bench Court I Appeal No. ST/350/2008 & ST/320/2009 (Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 01/2008 (S.Tax) (PNR) dated 11.03.2008, No. 07/2008 (S. Tax) (PNR) dated 29.10.2008 passed by Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Tirupati) M. Ramakrishna Reddy, Civil Contractors ..Appellant(s) Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Tirupati ..Respondent(s)
Appearance Shri Joseph K. Antony, Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri P. Bhuvaneshwar Rao, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent.
Coram:
Honble Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Honble Mr. MADHU MOHAN DAMODHAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Date of Hearing: 25/01/2018 Date of Decision: 25/01/2018 FINAL ORDER No. A/30128-30129/2018 [Order per: M.V. Ravindran] These two appeals are directed against Order-in-Original No. 01/2008 (S.Tax) (PNR) dated 11.03.2008 & Order-in-Original No. 07/2008 (S. Tax) (PNR) dated 29.10.2008.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the demand of service tax on the appellant is for the period July, 2006 to December, 2006 and January, 2007 to April, 2007 under the category of mining services. It is the case of the appellant mining services during the relevant period but the contention of the Revenue is that the services would fall geological, geophysical activities of excavation, overburden removal etc.
4. Learned Counsel submits that the issue has been settled by an earlier period and decided by this Bench in their favour holding that services which were rendered by the appellant would fall under the mining services taxable with effect from 01.06.2007 and produces the copy of the order as reported at [2009 (13) STR 661 (Tri. Bang)].
5. Learned Departmental Representative submits that Revenue has preferred an appeal against the said order in the Honble Apex Court the appeal has been admitted by the Apex Court as per Diary No. 6540/2009 in Civil appeal No. C/003987-003988/2009.
6. On specific query from the Bench, whether there was any stay by the Apex Court on these two matters against order passed by the Tribunal, it is informed by the Learned Counsel that there is no stay. Since there is no stay against the order passed by the Tribunal in the appellants own case on an identical issue, we find there is no reason for this bench to deviate from such a view already taken.
7. Accordingly following the said ratio, we hold that the impugned orders are unsustainable and liable to be set aside and we do so. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed.
(Order dictated & pronounced in open court)
MADHU MOHAN DAMODHAR M.V. RAVINDRAN
MEMBER (TECHNICAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
Lakshmi.
Appeal No. ST/350/2008 & ST/320/2009
3