Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 1148 - AT - Service TaxClassification of service - Business auxiliary services - use of electronic device to provide the service - Held that: - activity of Billing in the process of sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to the client would be covered in the clause (vii) of the Section 65(19) as business auxiliary service . Clause (i) read with clause (vii) includes in its ambit the activity of billing - In the instant case the activity of the appellant is clearly that of generating bills for MSEDCL and is squarely covered in the definition of business auxiliary service clause (vii) as billing - the prime purpose of the activity is to generate bills and it is only incidental that electronic programmable devices are used for this purpose. The use of this device cannot change the nature of the services - the service provided by the appellant falls under the category of business auxiliary service and not information technology service or business support service. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - Recording of a statement during the investigation cannot be considered as disclosure of information. The appellants were engaged in providing the service much before the recording of statement and they had not voluntarily come forward to pay service tax on the service or to disclose the full details to the Revenue - extended period rightly invoked. Benefit of N/N. 12/2003-ST and/or exclusion of the cost of material used during the provision of service - Held that: - To avail the notification they have to prove that they had sold the goods during the provision of service to the client and produce necessary evidence like payment of VAT to establish the same. Abatement of the value of the goods and material consumed - pure agent or not - Rule 5(2) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value of Taxable Services) Rules, 2006 - Held that: - as the appellants are service providers to MSDECL and service tax is payable on the value recovered by the appellants from the service receiver. The claim of deduction, if any, has to be supported by N/N. 12/2003-ST or the Service Tax (Determination of Value of Taxable Services) Rules, 2006. It is seen that the appellants do not qualify for any such deduction. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|