Eltel Engineers vs Unknown

Arising out of the order in original No.15 & 16/COMMR/CEX/ADJ/STN/2010/5038 dated 27.10.2010 passed by the Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Bhopal.

For Approval and Signature:

Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President

Honble Mr. R.K. Singh, Technical Member

1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 26 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 26 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

Eltel Engineers .. Appellant

Vs.

C.C.E., Bhopal .. Revenue

Appearance:

Present Shri Akhil Gupta, C.A. for the appellant

Present Shri Govind Dixit, A.R. for the Revenue

Coram: Honble Mr. Justice G.Raghuram, President

Honble Mr. R.K. Singh, Technical Member

Final Order No. 52274-52275/2015

Per Justice G. Raghuram:

These two appeals are preferred against a common adjudication order dated 27.10.2010 passed by the Commissioner, Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Bhopal, confirming a cumulative demand of Rs.1,03,58,984/- apart from interest and penalties, as specified therein.

2. Proceedings were initiated under two show cause notices dated 3.10.08 and 21.10.2009 covering the period July 2003 to December 2007 and an overlapping period i.e., 2004-05 to 2008-09. The cumulative demand comprises service tax of Rs.23,562/- plus interest therein and penalty of an equivalent amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 for rendition of consultancy service and service tax of Rs.34,437/-, apart from interest and penalty of an equivalent amount under Section 78 of the Act representing service tax collected by the appellant but not remitted to the exchequer, under Section 75A of the Act. The appellant does not contest the demand of service tax, interest and penalties on these two aspects. These are therefore confirmed. Balance of the demand arises on the rendition of Erection, Commissioning or Installation service by the appellant by way of supply and installation of cables and lines (connectors) for distribution and transmission of electricity for the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB) through its instrumentality M/s Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. (MPKVVCL).

3. Notification No.45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 was issued by the Central Government in exercise of powers passed under Section 11C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, whereby taxable services relating to transmission and distribution of electricity provided by a service provider to a service receiver for the period upto 21.6.2010 was exempted from service tax.

4. In the circumstances, the appellant is not liable to collection of service tax in terms of Notification No.45/2010-ST on the entirety of the demand confirmed by the order impugned, except demand of service tax, interest and penalty on the tax components of Rs.23,562/- and Rs.34,437/-. The appeals are therefore allowed to the above extent. There shall be no order as to costs.

(Justice G. Raghuram)

President

(R.K. Singh)

Technical Member

scd/

1