TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (T) Shri R. Masillamony, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri M.K.A.K. Mohiddin, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - M/s. Indian Institution of Quality Assurance (IIQA), Trichy, has filed this appeal challenging a demand of service tax of Rs. 6,97,315/- from them under the head 'Consulting Engineer' and penalties imposed on them under Sections 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Act). The impugned order affirmed the finding that IIQA registered as a provider of 'Technical Inspection and Certification' service' since 1-7-03 with the Trichy Central Excise Commissionerate, had rendered service of consulting engineer during the period April, 2000 to June, 2003. The original authority found that though the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to ensure quality of cut sheets in respect of TNPL and quality inspection of products of Sterlite Industries. Since 1-7-03, the entire activity of the appellants was subjected to tax under the category Technical Inspection and Certification service. The impugned order found that the same activity amounted to consulting engineer service and affirmed the demand under that category for the period prior to 1-7-03 when the appellants registered with the department as a provider of service under the category Technical Inspection and Certification service. 3. Relying on the decision of the Tribunal in Cameo Corporation Services Ltd. v. CCE, (S.T.), Chennai, [2008] (11) S.T.R. 161 (Tri.-Chen.)] and Diebold Systems (P) Ltd. v. CCE (S.T.), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned order to constitute engineering consultancy. However, since 1-7-03, when a new service 'Technical Inspection and Certification' was introduced, the appellants were registered as provider of the said service and their activities subjected to tax under that category ever since. The impugned demand is for the same activity for the period prior to 1-7-03. 5.1 In the impugned order the activities undertaken by the appellants are listed by the original authority. More important of the observations are extracted below. On an analysis of these activities, the original authority came to the conclusion that the assessee is engaged in engineering consultancy. "(i) The services provided by IIQA are not mere inspection/witnessing of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovider under Technical Inspection and Certification service since 1-7-03 and their activities continue to be assessed to tax under this head since then. If these activities constitute service of consulting engineer, the Revenue has to take action to classify the service under the appropriate head and assess the same to liability correctly under that head for the period since 1-7-03 as well. Since the activities continue to be classified under Technical Inspection and Certification service, it cannot be held that for an earlier period these activities were classifiable under the head Consulting Engineer. In this regard, the ratio of the decisions of the Tribunal in the cases of Cameo Corporation Services Ltd. v. CCE (S.T.), Chennai and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
