TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the scope of advice, consultancy or technical assistance in the field of civil engineering which is a discipline of engineering - normal period of one year covered the period from 01.04.2006 onwards for which the demand has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority. As stated earlier, the demand prior to 01.05.2006 is not sustainable and consequently the Revenue appeal against dropping of the demand for the extended period (beyond the normal period of one year) which was the period prior to 01.04.2006 becomes unsustainable on that count alone apart from the reasons given by the adjudicating authority that the assessee could not be held guilty of wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed but did not pay any service tax thereon, although, the Commissioner held, it was liable to pay service tax on such supervision charges under Consulting Engineer Service. 3. The assessee has contended that it was receiving payment towards supervision which did not constitute Consulting Engineer Service. 4. We have considered the contentions of the appellant. It is seen that the assessee has a separate Engineering Wing which undertook supervision of the construction activities and charged an amount equal to 10% of the construction cost. The definition of Consulting Engineering Service given in Section 65(18)/ 65 (31) (as applicable) of the Finance Act, 1994 during the relevant period read as under: Consulting Engineer means any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s clear that a body corporate was outside the scope of definition of consulting engineer prior to 01.05.2006. In the light of the said judgment, the demand pertaining to the period prior to 01.05.2006 is obviously not sustainable. We find that the normal period of one year covered the period from 01.04.2006 onwards for which the demand has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority. As stated earlier, the demand prior to 01.05.2006 is not sustainable and consequently the Revenue appeal against dropping of the demand for the extended period (beyond the normal period of one year) which was the period prior to 01.04.2006 becomes unsustainable on that count alone apart from the reasons given by the adjudicating authority that the assessee cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
