The Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Versus M/s. Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd., Chennai-4
Service Tax
2018 (12) TMI 934 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 27-11-2018
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.2745 to 2749 of 2018 And CMP.Nos.20855, 20857, 20860 & 20863 of 2018
Service Tax
Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mr.Justice N. Sathish Kumar
For the Appellant : Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda
For the Respondent : Mr.N.Viswanathan and Mr.S.Baskaran
COMMON JUDGMENT
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J
Mr.N.Viswanathan and Mr.S.Baskaran, learned counsel accept notice for the respondent. We have heard the learned counsel on either side and with consent, the above appeals are taken up for joint disposal.
2. These appeals are filed by the Revenue under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter called the Act) challenging the common final order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called the Tr
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e assessee without verifying the claim of the assessee that they completed the services prior to 01.6.2007 and consequently, they are entitled for abatement.
5. We have perused the common order passed by the Tribunal and we find that the Tribunal took note of an earlier passed in the assessee's own case in Final Order No.40902/2016 dated 06.6.2016.
6. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that the said final order passed by the Tribunal dated 06.6.2016 was an order remanding the matter with the specific direction to the Adjudicating Authority to examine the taxability of the services involved in the execution of the works contract and if such contracts were executed prior to 01.6.2007, the Adjudicating Authorities were directed to deal with such cases after taking note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Kerala Vs. Larsen & Toubro Limited [reported (2015) 39 STR 913].
7. It is a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ed in the show cause notice dated 30.11.2010. It is further pointed out that in yet another assessment for the period from April 2011 to March 2012 and for the subsequent periods, show cause notices were issued and were adjudicated and Orders-in-Original dated 22.3.2018 were passed dropping the proposal in the relevant show cause notices by accepting the claim of the assessee with regard to abatement.
10. Though the learned counsel for the assessee is partially right in referring to the Orders-in-Original dated 27.1.2017 and 22.3.2018, still we cannot dispense with the verification process because the periods involved in these appeals are different from the periods involved in the other cases.
Therefore, to that extent, we are of the opinion that the Adjudicating Authority should verify the nature of transactions to ascertain as to whether the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Larsen & Toubro Limited can be applied to the case of the assessee.
11. Accordingly, the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =