9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law : (a) Whether, the CESTAT was legal and correct in setting aside the impugned OLA No. 59/2004, dated 14-6-2004 with consequential relief, when the activities undertaken by the respondent came squarely within the ambit of Consulting Engineer service, and service tax was levied on design development only. (b) Whether, the CESTAT was legal and correct in holding that the contracts entered into by the respondents were "Works Contracts", and hence not leviable to service tax. (c) Whether, ratio of decisions relied on by CESTAT applies to the facts of the present case. 2. The facts leading to this case are as hereunder : The respondent-assessee is registered under the provisions of Finance Act 1994. The Department holding that the respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the parties. 5. The main crux of the matter in this case is whether on the date of relevant assessment period the service rendered by the assessee has to be classified under the definition Section 65(13), as 'Consulting Engineer' and whether the assessee can be brought into tax considering the work executed by the assessee as a 'Works Contract'. 6. If these two questions are answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee, the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are to be answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. If the case of the assessee does not fall under Section 65(13) of the Act and if the works contract executed by the assessee during relevant assessment peri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken such a view, considering the relevant assessment year in the present case we have to hold that the service rendered by the assessee-Company during relevant period cannot be brought under the category of consulting engineer. If the service rendered by the assessee cannot be considered as a consulting engineer, the question of calling upon the assessee to pay the service tax under the Finance Act, brought the assessee under the word consulting engineer does not arise at all. Therefore, the said point has to be answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. 9. So far as the execution of the works contract is concerned, the works contract is defined under section 65(105)(zzzza) which reads as under : (zzzza) to any person, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation or restoration of, or similar services, in relation to (b) and (c); or (e) turnkey projects including engineering, procurement and construction or commissioning (EPC) projects. 10. This section has come into force with effect from 1-6-2007. After considering the contract entered into between the assessee and its employer, the case of the assessee falls under Section 65(105)(zzzza) Explanation (a) and (e). Even though the assessee's case falls under the definition of works contract, but the revenue has no power to call upon the assessee to pay service tax, interest and penalty therein, since the provisions of law has come into force with effect from 1-6-2007. 11. In the present case, con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
