M/S Shreya Electricals vs Commissioner Of Central Excise Belgaum
- CitationAppeal No. 372/2012 dated 13/08/2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Ma
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The question is whether services rendered before 21 June 2010 fall within the exemption in Notification No. 45/2010-S.T. dated 20 July 2010, which exempts such services from service tax; the Tribunal holds that where the applicability of that notification has not been examined by the adjudicating authority, the impugned order cannot stand and the matter must be remanded for de novo adjudication in its light, following the Tribunal's earlier decisions remitting the same issue.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 372/2012 dated 13/08/2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mangalore]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK KUMAR ARYA, TECHNICAL MEMBER
1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 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 Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes
M/s SHREYA ELECTRICALS 118, SILVER TOWN, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI-580 030 Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise BELGAUM NO. 71, CLUB ROAD, CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING, BELGAUM 590001. Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. S. Sivakumar, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. Pakshirajan, A.R. For the Respondent
Date of Hearing: 24/07/2015 Date of Decision: 24/07/2015 CORAM :
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK KUMAR ARYA, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Final Order No. 21688 / 2015
PER ARCHANA WADHWA
After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit, we proceed to dispose of the appeal itself inasmuch as the issue stands decided by earlier decision of the Tribunal.
2. Service tax stands confirmed against the appellant under the category of Maintenance and repair services; and Erection, Commissioning and Installation services rendered by them to M/s Karnataka Power Transmission Company Ltd. (KPTCL). Learned advocate draws our attention to the provisions of Notification No. 45/2010-S.T. dated 20.07.2010 vide which such services rendered prior to 21/6/2010 were exempted from payment of service tax. The period involved is 2004-05 to 2006-07. Learned advocate has also drawn our attention to various decisions of the Tribunal wherein a note of the said notification in question, the matter was remanded for examining the applicability of the same. Reference can be made to the following decisions :
(i) M/s Chopra Electrical Works vs. CCE, Chandigarh-II [2014-TIOL-2287-CESTAT-DEL]
(ii) B.Srinivasa Rao Vs. CC&CE, Hyderabad-III [2014-TIOL-2287-CESTAT-DEL]
(iii) Noida Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida [2014(33) S.T.R. 383 (Tri.-Delhi)]
(iv) Kedar Constructions Vs.CCE, Kolhapr [2015 (37) S.T.R. 631(Tri.-Mumbai)]
3. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant fairly agrees that the said notification was issued subsequent to passing of the present impugned order. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo decision in the light of the notification in question and also the decisions of the Tribunal referred supra.
4. Stay petition as also appeal get disposed of in the above manner.
(Pronounced in open court)
(ASHOK KUMAR ARYA) TECHNICAL MEMBER (ARCHANA WADHWA) JUDICIAL MEMBER
/vc/
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free