2014 (3) TMI 115 - AT - Service Tax

Demand of service tax - erection, commission and installation of service - Held that - erection, installation service shall be brought into tax when such service was dominate in nature. No doubt there may be involvement of goods. We consider the abetment aspect at this stage subject to detailed scrutiny in the course of regular hearing - So far as management, maintenance or repair service is concerned, the discussion made by Adjudicating Authority does not grant immunity to the appellant for taxation. Mere payment of VAT does not take away the activity from the net of the taxing entry under Finance Act, 1994 - stay granted partly.

Summary

Issues:
1. Liability for service tax on different activities carried out by the appellant.
2. Applicability of Circular No. 123/5/2010-ST on certain services.
3. Taxability of erection, commission, and installation services.
4. Determination of liability for management, maintenance, or repair services.

Analysis:

1. The judgment addressed the liability for service tax on various services provided by the appellant, including Commercial or Industrial Construction Service, Complex Construction Service, Erection Commissioning or Installation service, and Management, Maintenance, or Repair Service. The appellant claimed that the liability for the first two services had been discharged, while for the third service, certain services were not liable to service tax as per Circular No. 123/5/2010-ST. The issue of liability for the last service was also discussed.

2. The appellant argued that the entire value of the erection, commission, and installation service should not be subject to service tax if the Board Circular is followed. The Revenue's approach to dealing with this service was examined, and the dominant nature of the service was considered, despite the involvement of goods. The Tribunal decided to subject this service to detailed scrutiny during regular hearings.

3. Regarding the management, maintenance, or repair service, the appellant contended that since the activity was primarily repair, there should be no liability for maintenance. However, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant immunity to the appellant for taxation on this service. The Tribunal observed that the taxable service was provided, and mere payment of VAT did not exempt the activity from service tax under the Finance Act, 1994.

4. After assessing the activities and materials involved, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a specified amount in two installments. The first installment was to be paid by a certain date, followed by the second installment, with compliance required by a specified deadline. The judgment highlighted the need for the appellant to fulfill the payment obligations as directed by the Tribunal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved and the Tribunal's decision on each issue related to the liability for service tax on different activities carried out by the appellant.