Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 132 - CESTAT CHANDIGARHExemption to taxable service provided for distribution of electricity - services performed as an agent on behalf on the principal - appellant is a distribution licensee or not? - Benefit of N/N. 32/2010-ST dated 22/06/2010 denied - sole ground for denial of benefit of exemption N/N. 32/2010-ST dated 22/06/2010 is that the appellant is not a distribution licensee or distribution franchisee or any other person authorized under the Electricity Act for distribution of electricity - Held that:- Admittedly, the appellant is providing the services of distribution of electricity on behalf of DHBVN & UNBVN, who are the distribution licensees. Therefore, it is to be seen that whether the appellant got the right for transmission of electricity from their principals. Admittedly, the appellant has provided these services on behalf of the distribution licensee, who are having license to distribute the electricity. In the case of Canara Bank [2012 (6) TMI 274 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD], this Tribunal got an occasion to examine the issue whether a person, who is providing services on behalf of the principal is entitled to the benefit of notification or not, and it was held that an exemption to the principal would be available to agent also. As the appellant is providing services on behalf of the principal, who is having a license as distribution licensee to distribute electricity under the Electricity Act. Therefore, the benefit exemption N/N. 32/2010-ST dated 22/06/2010 cannot be denied to the appellant. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|