Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2023 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 321 - CESTAT NEW DELHIClassification of services - Manpower Supply Services or Maintenance and Repair Services? - abatement under Notification No.24/2012-ST dated 06.06.2012 - reverse charge mechanism - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- From the documents submitted by the appellant, it is clear that the services rendered by them have been rightly classified under the category of “Maintenance and Repair Services”. It further says that the appellant company approached, to provide the said service as required expressing the desire to take job of coil winding and Core Coil Assembly of transformers at their factory. The other clauses in the agreement also speaks about management or supervision activities to be carried out by the appellant company. In order to execute any work or provide any services some sort of manpower is required, however by reason thereof the agreement cannot be construed as one of providing manpower - the authorities below have rightly classified the services rendered by the appellant as one of "Maintenance and Repairs" only rather than for "Supply of Manpower". Whether the appellant is entitle to claim the benefit of abatement of duty under Notification No.24/ 2012? - HELD THAT:- The services rendered by the appellant falls in the category of "Maintenance and Repairs Services" for which no abatement is available under any of the two Notifications. Consequently, the service tax is payable on the whole gross amount received or billed by the appellant for providing the services. The appellant has next contended that under the RCM, the service tax has been paid by the recipient of the service, however perusal of the bills raised, the TDS Certificate of the service recipient does not disclose that the service tax has been paid by the recipient of the service and therefore the submissions made by the appellant cannot be agreed upon. The demand raised under both the show cause notices is recoverable from the appellant along with interest as the entire amount of service tax was not paid by the due date under section 75 of the Finance Act, invoking the extended period of limitation under section 73 as the appellant neither assessed the correct amount of service tax nor revealed the actual amount in the ST 3 returns - Appeal dismissed.
|