9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 121X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;Consulting Engineers' were brought under the Service Tax Net w.e.f. 7-7-1997. 'Consulting Engineer' is defined to be "a professionally qualified engineer or an engineering firm who either directly or indirectly renders any advice, consultancy or technical service in any manner to a client in one or more disciplines of engineering." The Central Board of Excise & Customs, in their Circular dated 2-7-1997, has explained the scope of services of a Consulting Engineer, which includes any one or more of the following (i) Feasibility study (ii) Pre-design services/project reports (iii) Basic design engineering (iv) Detailed design engineering (v) Procurement (vi) Construction, supervision and project management (vii) Supervision of commissioning and initial operation (viii) Manpower planning and training (ix) Post operation and management (x) Trouble shooting and technical services including establishment systems and procedures for an existing plant. In view of the scope of the 'Consulting Engineer' service as clarified by the CBEC. Revenue examined the nature of the services undertaken by the appellant and issued a series of Show Cause Notices for demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mand of Rs. 2,47,671/- being the Service Tax payable by the appellant for the above mentioned period. He has set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellants are highly aggrieved over the impugned orders and, therefore, they have come before us for relief. 3. Shri Gangadharan, the learned Assistant Officer (Taxes), of the appellant Company, appeared for the appellants and Shri S.M. Tata, the learned DR for the Revenue. 4. We heard both. sides. Shri Gangadharan, the learned Assistant Officer (Taxes) of the appellant unit, argued that the appellant company is a Govt. of Kerala Unit and they are only engaged mainly in the manufacture of Transformers and later, on the basis of the contract with their clients, they supply and undertake the erection and commissioning of the same. According to him, the appellant unit cannot be called as Consulting Engineers. He emphasised that they only manufacture the Transformers and the cost of the design, drawing, engineering etc. are already included in the cost of the Transformer on which they had paid the Central Excise duty. Therefore, they cannot be taxed further. Further, he said that they are actually not Consu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the impugned Order-in-Revision 3/2005-06, there are 101 invoices. The description of work done, the invoice number and the amounts charged for these services are indicated. A perusal of these annexure reveals that the work done relates to designing and engineering, supervision of erection installation, supervising charges for service technicians, design and drawing, training for technical personnel, design excavation and installation, charges for supervision, commissioning, supervising charges for engineer, etc. The Commissioner, in his Order-in-Revision, has examined the services rendered by the appellant in the light of the Board's order and in para 9 of the Order-in-Revision, he has enumerated a few examples of the services rendered by the appellant : 1. Charges for design, engineering services for 132/6.6 KV Switch Yard. 2. Charges for erection and commissioning of equipment of 110 KV sub-station. 3. Charges for supervision and erection of 132/6" switch equipments for 75 days 4. Training for technical personnel 5. 5% amount claimed against submission of equipment, drawing and loading data 6. Service charges paid to engineers and technicians. In the light of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have to carry out design, drawing, engineering, training, supervision of erection, commissioning, trouble shooting, etc. All these activities come within the scope of activity of Consulting Engineers as clarified by the Board. It has also been held by the Tribunal in the case of Transweigh (India) Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 281(Tri.-Mumbai) = 2004 (170) E.L.T. 527 (Tri.) that the appellants' contention that to attract the levy of Service Tax under the category of Consulting Engineer, the service provider should be engaged solely in the process of rendering consulting services was not accepted. The appellant may to be a manufacturing company only but so long as they render certain services, which fall within the ambit of Consulting Engineers, they are liable for Service Tax. We find that the appellants employ highly qualified professional engineers for various activities. In the course of the implementation of various works given by their clients, they had to necessarily undertake certain services, which are in the nature of Consulting Engineer in the light of the Board's clarification issued in the year 1997. In the light of these things, we find that the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
