TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lls Royce [2004 (6) TMI 3 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] and CESTAT Mumbai’s decision in the case of Suzlon Windfarm and the CBEC’s further clarification dated 13.5.2004 [2014 (3) TMI 267 - CESTAT MUMBAI] and the discussion made above, it is clear that the impugned services are not covered under the category of consulting engineer's services and therefore are not taxable during the relevant period. Conseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... $ 123.99 million, out of which an amount of US $ 15 million represents the service part. On this US $ 15 million, the liability of service tax which is in dispute is of ₹ 40.83 lakhs along with the interest as applicable. 3. The Respondent M/s. Hyundai Engineering Construction Co. Ltd. is arguing that this part of the contract is not covered by Consulting Engineer service and this is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the work of erection and commissioning of machineries and plants is in the nature of providing technical assistance to the buyer and is in the nature of services provided by consulting engineer and would be chargeable to Service Tax as such. 5. The learned advocate for the respondent refers to CBECs further clarificatory Circular No.79/9/2004-ST dated 13.5.2004 wherein it says that c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Suzlon Windfarm Services Ltd. vs. CCE, Punt-II: 2014 (33) S.T.R. 65 (Tri.-Mumbai) wherein it says that the executory services do not come under the purview of Consulting Engineer service 7. Considering the decision of CESTAT, New Delhi in the case of Rolls Royce (supra) and CESTAT Mumbai s decision in the case of Suzlon Windfarm (supra) and the CBEC s further clarification dated 13.5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
