CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH – COURT NO. – IV Service Tax Appeal No. 51891 of 2018 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 96(AK)ST/JPR/2017-18 dated 30.05.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST (Appeals), Jaipur]

M/s. Road Infrastructure Development Company of Rajasthan Limited (RIDCOR) …Appellant LIC Jeevan Nidhi Building, Ambedkar Circle, Bhawani Singh Marg, Jaipur (Rajasthan)-302005 VERSUS Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Central Goods and Service Tax, Jaipur I …Respondent NCR Building, Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur - 302005 APPEARANCE:

Shri M.B. Maheshwari, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Ms. Jaya Kumari, Authorized Representative for the Respondent CORAM:

HON’BLE DR. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE MR. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

DATE OF HEARING: 16.10.2025 DATE OF DECISION: 13.02.2026 FINAL ORDER NO. 50267/2026 DR. RACHNA GUPTA M/s. Road Infrastructure Development Company of Rajasthan Limited, the appellant herein, is the holder of service tax registration being engaged in providing various taxable services as that of Renting of Immovable Property Services, Consulting Engineering Services, Works Contrat Services etc. There was an introduction of amendment vide Finance Act, 2016 incorporating Section 102 in the Act conveying that no service tax shall be levied or collected during the period commencing from 01.04.2015 and ending with 29.01.2016 both days inclusive), in respect of taxable services provided to the government, a local authority or a governmental authority by way of construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation or alteration of a civil structure or any other original works meant predominantly for use other than for commerce, industry, or any other business or profession.

2. Pursuant to the said provision, the appellant filed a refund claim of service tax amounting to Rs.1,58,03,017/- on 11.11.2016 for service tax paid on construction of multilevel parking at Nayi Sadak, Jodhpur, underground parking at Gandhi Maidan, Jodhpur and Hathiwala Park at Udaipur and Eklavya Model Residkential School, Rajgarh, Alwar claiming the exemption under serial no. 12(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 as amended vide Notification No. 09/2016-ST dated 01.03.2016 read with Section 102 of the Finance Act, 2016. However, department observed that the requisite documentary evidences were not provided by the appellant nor any evidence was provided vis-à-vis eligibility towards exemption Notification No. 25/2012. Accordingly, vide Show Cause Notice No. 18/151/2016 dated 05.01.2017, the refund claim of Rs.1,58,03,017/- was proposed to be rejected. The said proposal was confirmed vide Order-in-Original No. 228/2016- 17 dated 08.02.2017. Appeal against the said order has been rejected vide Order-in-Appeal No. 96/2017-18 dated 30.05.2018.

Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal.

3. We have heard Shri M.B. Maheshwari, learned Chartered Accountant for the appellant and Ms. Jaya Kumari, learned Authorized Representative for the department.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned refund claim has been filed in terms of Section 102 of the Finance Act, 1994 as was incorporated in view of the amendment act of 2016. The adjudicating authority below has failed to appreciate the legislative intention behind insertion of the said Section 102 which is a special provision granting retrospective exemption provided that the contracts for the purpose got entered into prior 01.03.2015. It is submitted that the appellant fulfilled all the conditions of the exemption vis-à-vis date of contract, nature of contract, type of service recipient and intention of services. Hence the rejection of refund claim is unreasonable and unjustified.

4.1 Learned counsel further submitted that the object of construction of parking facility was to provide parking space t