Page 91 - GSTL_18th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 3

2020 ] G.N. CONSTRUCTION v. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T., JALANDHAR 305

2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 305 (Tri. - Chan.)
IN THE CESTAT, REGIONAL BENCH, CHANDIGARH
[COURT NO. I]
S/Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) and Bijay Kumar, Member (T)
G.N. CONSTRUCTION
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T., JALANDHAR

Final Order No. A/61113/2019-CU(DB), dated 16-12-2019 in Appeal
No. ST/61288/2019
Works contract - Construction of EWS Flats and other services for Im-
provement Trust, Amritsar - Said flats distributed by Government among
jhuggi jhopri residents at much below than cost of construction - Flats not con-
structed for any commercial gain, therefore, assessee entitled for benefit of
Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. at Sr. No. 12(a) and (c) - However, said exemption
taken over by Notification No. 6/2015-S.T., dated 1-3-2015 with effect from 1-4-
2015 - Hence, for period prior to 1-4-2015, assessee not liable to pay Service Tax
but thereafter, assessee liable to pay only 50% of Service Tax in terms of Noti-
fication No. 30/2012-S.T. at Sr. No. 9 - Section 65(105)(zzzza) of Finance Act,
1994. [paras 12, 13, 14]
Demand - Works contract - Construction services rendered to PWD,
CPWD, PSIEC - Eligibility to benefit available in Sr. No. 9 of Notification No.
30/2012-S.T. - HELD : Sr. No. 9 in impugned Notification available to assessee
if services provided to business entity registered at body corporate - Trust car-
rying out activities relating to business/profession and accordingly, same to be
business entity and body corporate - Assessee required to pay 50% Service Tax
in terms of impugned Sr. No. 9 of Notification No. 30/2012-S.T. - Section
65(105)(zzzza) of Finance Act, 1994. [paras 15, 16, 17]
Demand - Works contract - Construction of Foot Over Bridge at BRTS
project - Assessee entitled for benefit of exemption Notification No. 12/2012-
S.T. at Sr. No. 13(a) - Section 65(105)(zzzza) of Finance Act, 1994. [para 18]
Appeal disposed of
CASE CITED
Bharat Bhushan Gupta & Company v. State of Haryana
— 2016 (44) S.T.R. 195 (P & H) — Referred ........................................................................... [Paras 4, 14]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Sudhir Malhotra, Advocate, for the Appellant.
S/Shri Rajiv Gupta and H.S. Brar, Authorised Rep-
resentative, for the Respondent.
[Order per : Ashok Jindal, Member (J)]. - The appellant is in appeal
against the impugned order, demanding Service Tax amounting to
Rs. 4,97,27,521/- and equivalent amount of penalty under Section 78 and a penal-
ty of Rs. 1,00,000/- under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the period
2013-14 to 2016-17.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was engaged in providing
Construction services in terms of ”Works Contract”, being composite contract as

GST LAW TIMES  18th June 2020  91