G. Raghuram, J. (President) - (1.)WE have heard learned Sr. Counsel Shri V. Sridharan, Shri S.R. Ashok and Sh. S. Ravi; learned Counsel Shri B.V. Kumar, G. Natarajan, Md. Shafi, K. Vijay Kumar, R. Murlidhar and Ms. Nisha Bineesh, for the appellants - assessees; and Dr. Anil Nigam, Shri R. Gurunathan, Shri Mohd. Yusuf, Shri Govind Dixit and Shri Amresh Jain, learned ARs for the respondent/Revenue.
(2.)BY the order dated 15.09.2014, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 8847 to 8849 of 2014 directed 47 appeals (from a list submitted by Shri Radhakrishnan, ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the Revenue) alongwith other connected cases pending adjudication before the regional Bench, CESTAT at Bangalore to be heard by a full Bench, presided by the President and to be disposed of by 15.03.2015.
The full Bench assembled on 15.12.2014 to hear the appeals (in terms of the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court), after issue of notices to parties concerned. The appeals were heard during 15.12.2014 to 19.12.2014. 79 matters were listed on the Board of the full Bench. Of these, in 19 appeals stay applications were pending disposal and Revenue contended that these appeals be not disposed of without considering waiver of pre -deposit and grant of stay. It was also urged that in ST Appeal Nos. 03174/2011 and 26382/2013, stay applications are pending consideration. In ST Appeal Nos. 3146/2011, 3147/2011, 254/2012 and 25302/2013, appellants Counsel contended that some substantive issues and regarding quantum of pre -deposit to be made, were pending before the Andhra Pradesh High Court. On behalf of Revenue, the contention on behalf of assessees that some aspects of the issues involved in these appeals were pending consideration before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, was not contested. Shri B.V. Kumar, learned Counsel also pointed out that in S.T. Appeal No. 3394 of 2012, the liability is also confirmed on the basis that the appellant (SCL Infratech Ltd.) had also provided Business Auxiliary Service and was the recipient of Management and Business Consultancy Service wherefore the liability was confirmed on reverse charge basis, erroneously.

(3.)APPELLANTS are the assessees, who had provided construction related and other categories of composite, bundled services, which inhered deemed sales (transfer) of property in goods together with rendition of associated services involved in execution of "works contract", as this expression has come to be recognized in the world of commerce, in law and in jurisprudence. In some of the listed appeals, contracts/agreements were entered into and the execution thereunder commenced prior to 01.06.2007 and continued thereafter as well. In other appeals constructions were subsequent to 01.06.2007. In appeals involving execution which commenced prior to 01.06.2007 and continued thereafter the transactions were classified (in respective adjudication orders impugned), as 'Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service' (ECIS) for the period prior to 01.06.2007; and as works contract service (WCS) [under sub -clause (e) of Explanation (ii) in Section 65(105)(zzzza)] for the period subsequent to 01.06.2007.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.