Bookmarks   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login  
Tax Management India .com   
   TMI - Tax Management India. Com   
Whether the service of a copy of the order by Speed Post, would constitute valid service under Customs Act, 1962? - Held Yes - HC    *    Donation to political party - Return filed with Election Commission, indicate the name and donor details - Deduction u/s 80GGC allowed - Tri    *    Service tax exemption for transportation of life saving medicines    *    Regarding cenvat credit on service tax on rent a cab    *    Central Excise Exemption of ₹ 150 Lakhs    *    Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas (Amendment) Regulations, 2016    *    Export under GST Act    *    Cenvat credit on water treatment plant    *    Banking Sector Reforms: A Journey, Not a Destination (Shri S. S. Mundra, Deputy Governor August 24, 2016 at India Banking Reforms Conclave 2016 organized by Governance Now in Mumbai)    *    Exchange Rate Notification with effect from 27th Aug., 2016 thereby amending Notfn. 112/2016-Cus (NT)    *    Regarding appointment of CAA by M/s Nagarjuna Oil Corporation Ltd, Chennai    *    Seeks to further amend notification No.12/2012-Central Excise dated 17.03.2012 so as to levy Basic Excise Duty at a concessional rate of 2% on Aviation Turbine Fuel drawn by operators or cargo operators from the Regional Connectivity Scheme (RCS) airports for a period of 3 years    *    Amendment in Notification No.78/2014-Customs (N.T.) dated the 16th September, 2014    *    WITH GST CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS, WHAT NEXT ?    *    Companies Act, 2013-25 Key Highlights    *    Just because the Nepalese suppliers had billed the appellants separately for transportation from Nepal border to factory premises alongwith other expenses, they do not become the agents of the appellants - tappellants cannot be treated as recipients of GTA services in terms of Notification No. 35/04-S.T. appellant not liable to pay service tax - Tri    *    Method of valuation - the food processor basic unit along with the accessories are to be assessed together as electric mechanical domestic appliance with self contained electric motor and are chargeable to duty on MRP basis. - Tri    *    Invokation of extended period of limitation - willful misstatement/ suppression of facts - something more must be shown to construe the acts of the appellant as fit for the applicability of the proviso. - Tri    *    To take a view that the benefit of exemption can be extended only to those pipes which physically carry water and deny it to those which are used as Casing Pipes (which are also needed for delivery of water) would defeat very purpose of the Exemption Notification meant for giving the benefit to water treatment plants - Tri    *    Refund claim - period of limitation - In fact there is no time limit prescribed for issue of show-cause notice under Section 11B and thus it is open to Revenue to point out the short comings in the refund claim - Tri    *    Housing' made of plastic is not eligible for exemption available to the 'connector's. However many of such small consignments have been cleared under claim for exemption. - levy of penalty confirmed, though reduced - Tri    *    Revised guidelines for disposal of confiscated goods - regarding
Home News Commentaries / Editorials Month 4 2009 2009 (4)
← Previous Next →

Applicability of Service Tax on AMC Contracts

April 8, 2009
  • News

Tribunal has recently decided a case involving an important issue of applicability of service tax on AMC contract where the material is part of the AMC contract.



Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994

Notification No. 12/2003, dated 20-6-2003

Article 366(29A)(b) of the Constitution

Shilpa Colour Lab v. CCE - 2007 -TMI - 1022 - CESTAT,BANGALORE

Kone Elevators India (P.) Ltd. v. CST - 2007 TMI - 2300 - CESTAT, CHENNAI

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India - 2006 -TMI - 309 - Supreme court

Imagic Creative (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - 2008 -TMI - 2576 - Supreme Court of India

BPL Mobile Communications Ltd. v. CCE - 2007 -TMI - 1550 - CESTAT,MUMBAI

ASL Motors (P.) Ltd. v. CCE, C&ST - 2008 -TMI - 3419 - CESTAT, KOLKATA

Facts of the Case:

The appellants undertake installation of various medical equipments. They enter into Annual Maintenance Contract with their customers for maintenance of such equipments.

They have entered in an agreement called "Maxicare and Comprehensive Annual Maintenance Contract".

In this the appellants apart from supplying labour, also supply the materials which have to be used in the maintenance contract.

In other words, for the maintenance of the equipments at certain times the spare parts etc. have to be replaced and the contract covers these spares also.

Appellant's Contention

That they are not liable to pay service tax on the cost of the materials supplied in the course of the service.

In fact, the appellants have paid service tax only on 30 per cent value of the gross receipt.

In respect of the remaining 70 per cent, they have stated that they had paid the sales tax to the State Government.

According to them, in any works contract the transfer of property in the course of the works contract will be considered as sale.

For this they have relied on the Constitutional provision in article 366(29)(B) of the Constitution

Department's Contention

Entire amounts received by the appellants in these cases are liable to service tax under the category of "Annual Maintenance and Repair Service'.


Once, the sales tax has been paid on the materials, then on the same service tax also cannot be charged. In fact, the appellants had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the Modi Xerox Ltd.'s case (supra) it has been clearly held that in the Annual Maintenance Contract, the replacement of spares etc. would be considered as sale.

Even in the present case, on 70 per cent of the value sales tax has been paid and this has been accepted by the Government of Karnataka. This fact also cannot be ignored.

Moreover, Notification No. 12/2003, dated 20-6-2003 clearly provides for exempting the value of the materials sold during the provision of the service. Whenever, any service is provided if in the course of the provision of the service certain materials are used they will definitely be considered as sale. This is clearly covered by the Constitutional article 366(29A)(b) cited by the learned Advocate.

We do not agree with the learned Commissioner that the said Constitutional provision has no application here.

The Maintenance and Repair Contract entered into by the appellant with their customers has been recognized as Works Contract by the Government of Karnataka and the registration has been obtained for payment of sales tax. When that is the case, it cannot be said that the spare parts received by the clients of the appellant have not been sold to them.

We hold that in any Annual Maintenance Contract the spare parts etc. which have been used in the course of the maintenance service are definitely to be considered as sold and when sales tax has been paid on the value of such goods, simultaneously one cannot charge them to the service tax.

In view of these clear legal provisions, there is absolutely no justification for levy of service tax beyond 30 per cent of the value of the total contract.


For full text of judgment visit:


[2009 -TMI - 32871 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]




← Previous Next →
what is new what is new

Advanced Search

Latest Updates




More Options


|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map || ||

© [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version