Tubewell drilling supply and installation
This query is : Resolved
14 May 2016
The description of work is construction of 200 mm diameter tubewell supply and installation of submersible pump sets and commissioning of tube well with 5 year defect liability in rural area . This work is awarded by Government and its use is non commercial. The work basically involve deep drilling with machine and then lowering of casing pipe, delivery pipe, cable and submersible pump, fitting and installation of electric penal and commissioning of tubewell for water supply. It is a public utility work. . It is a composite work of drilling, supply and installation of pipe, motor and commissioning thereof. Whether this work is liable for service tax ? if it is liable to service tax then under which category under which clause it falls? If it is exempt then under which clause it is exempt? What is the position in 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16? Please guide. Also Provide relevant case laws.
14 May 2016
The above work is exempted from service tax all these years. See para 12 (e) of mega exemption notification 25/2012 ST.
14 May 2016
Sir clause 12(e) read as - pipe line, conduit or plant for (i) water supply, (ii) water treatment or (iii) water sewerage treatment or disposal: or.
Sir in which term it falls, whether in pipe line or conduit or plant. Sir the Mega Exemption is from 01.07.12 and what will be the position from 01.04.11 to 30.06.12. Is there any case law . Department is intending to cover it either in erection, installation or commissioning service or in works contract service.
Sir in which term it falls, whether in pipe line or conduit or plant. Sir the Mega Exemption is from 01.07.12 and what will be the position from 01.04.11 to 30.06.12. Is there any case law . Department is intending to cover it either in erection, installation or commissioning service or in works contract service.
14 May 2016
It will fall under Plant for (1) water supply. It can't be covered under erection and commissioning see the Tribunal decision in the case of Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd v. CCE(2008) 16 STT 136 (Chennai CESTAT) and in the case of Lalit constructions v.Commissioner of Central Excise Raigad Feb 23,2012(Cestat Mumbai bench).
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Difference between Date of Payment and Date of Deduction?
- Unregistered suppliers utility
- ITDS U/S.194T of Firm
- EXPORT COMMERCIAL INVOICE HSN CODE
- Cash balance limit and property purchases limit
- FCRA 6 E- Intimation
- Same demand raised for original as well as rectification request return
- Sale of property held jointly with a non resident Indian
- GST not cancelled by tenant
- FORM 141 SDV query
- Filling ITR - U
- Form 140 tds
- RCM @ 5% on Hamali charges, Transport Charges, Unloading charges we take ITC or not
- CALCULATION OF DEFFERED TAX - OP BL IS DTL & CURRET IT DTA
- LLP audit under companies act
- Experienced CA recommendation from Kolkata for FNO return filing
- Interest Reporting in Form 168
- Sales of goods of amount Rs77 lakhs to a party
- Tax Demand of ₹4,650 for AY 2026-27
- Concept of Vendor and customner reconciliation
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals
CAclubindia
