2025-VIL-280-CESTAT-KOL-ST
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-280-CESTAT-KOL-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Works contract service, Sub-contractor, Service provided in SEZ, Works Contract Service, CENVAT Credit, Limitation - Services of 'erection, commissioning and installation service' - Show Cause Notice demanding service tax under various categories of services. The demands were confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order - Whether the appellant, being a sub-contractor, is eligible for the exemption from service tax on the services rendered within the SEZ area - HELD - The appellant, being a sub-contractor, is eligible for the exemption from service tax on the services rendered within the SEZ area. The Tribunal relied on the decisions in the cases of M/s. Randhawa Construction v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Vadodara-I and M/s. Anjani Excavation Operation v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, which held that the exemption available to the main contractor is equally applicable to the sub-contractor when the services are rendered within the SEZ. There is no dispute that the appellant has rendered the services within the SEZ area, and hence, the appellant is eligible for the exemption - the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed - Whether the services rendered by the appellant to M/s. Tata Projects Limited should be classified as 'works contract service' and not as 'erection, commissioning and installation service' - HELD - The services rendered by the appellant to M/s. Tata Projects Limited should be classified as 'works contract service' and not as 'erection, commissioning and installation service'. The contract clearly mentioned that the appellant was liable to use consumables like welding electrodes, hand gloves, oxy/acetylene gas, etc. hence, the services rendered by the appellant, which include materials, are rightly covered under the category of 'works contract service' - Whether the appellant is entitled to the CENVAT credit which was disallowed on procedural grounds - HELD - The is entitled to the CENVAT credit which was disallowed on procedural grounds. The Tribunal observed that the appellant had paid the service tax under the bona fide belief that they are liable to pay service tax on the 'Erection Commissioning and Installation Services' and 'Works Contract Services' under reverse charge. The Tribunal also observed that the appellant had indicated the availment and utilization of credit in the S.T.-3 Returns filed by them, and hence, the Department cannot invoke the extended period of limitation to deny the credit, which is otherwise eligible to the appellant - Whether the demands confirmed in the impugned order are barred by limitation due to the delay in the adjudication of the Show Cause Notice - HELD - The demands confirmed in the impugned order are barred by limitation due to the delay in the adjudication of the Show Cause Notice. The Tribunal relied on the decisions in the cases of M/s. Kopertek Metals Pvt. Ltd. & ors. v. Commissioner of CGST (West), New Delhi and M/s. VOS Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Principal Additional Director General & ors., wherein it was held that the adjudication must be completed within the time-limit prescribed under the statute.
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST changes in July '25
By Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?