M\/s. Indian Telephone Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai South Commissionerate
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 718 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 7-3-2018
ST\/Misc.\/41378\/2017 and ST\/323\/2011 – 40582\/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
\nShri Raghavan Ramabhadran, Advocate for the Appellant
\nShri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
\nPer Bench
\nThe appellants are inter alia engaged in execution of work of trenching and laying of underground cable and allied works. They are registered with the Service Tax Department under the category of 'Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n unsel Shri Raghavan Ramabhadran submitted that the issue whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax on the activity of trenching and laying telephone cables is clarified by Board's Circular No. 123\/5\/2010-TRU dated 24.5.2010 wherein it has been held that such activities would not fall under taxable category of Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services. Further, in the decision of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. Rajeev Electrical Works- 2014 (18) STR 705 (P&H), the Hon'ble High Court has held that laying the pipes in wall\/roof\/floor for crossing of wires, fixing the junction box, fixing the cables trays to lay the cables, digging the earth to lay the cables and digging the earth pits for earthing etc. w<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. Indian Telephone Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai South CommissionerateService Tax2018 (6) TMI 718 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMICESTAT CHENNAI – ATDated:- 7-3-2018ST\/Misc.\/41378\/2017 and ST\/323\/2011 – 40582\/2018Service TaxMs. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri Raghavan Ramabhadran, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K.P. Muralidharan, … Continue reading “M\/s. Indian Telephone Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai South Commissionerate”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12244","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12244","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12244"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12244\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12244"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12244"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12244"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n