2017 (9) TMI 31 - AT - Service Tax

Consulting Engineering Services - levy of service tax - Held that - in the case of L&T Ltd 2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT the Hon ble Apex Court has held that Works Contract Services prior to the period 1.6.07 are not subject to levy of service tax - the appellants are not liable to pay service tax under the category of Consulting Engineering Services - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Liability to pay service tax under Consulting Engineering Services.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in turnkey projects, entered into contracts with a corporation for engineering and construction services. The coordination agreement stated the obligations as a single obligation and detailed the completion of the facility. The appellant initially paid service tax but later sought a refund, which was rejected. The Tribunal previously held that the appellants did not render Consulting Engineering Services, leading to a refund. The issue attained finality after a High Court dismissal.

2. The Department issued a Show Cause Notice for non-filing of service tax returns. The appellant responded, stating no taxable services were rendered. Subsequently, a demand for service tax was raised for a specific period. The original authority confirmed the demand, leading the appellants to appeal before the Tribunal.

3. The appellant argued that previous Tribunal decisions favored them, emphasizing the project's turnkey nature and citing relevant case law. They contended that the contract was composite, involving material and labor, and not subject to service tax before a specified date. The extended period was deemed inapplicable due to the refund granted earlier.

4. The Department argued that the contracts were independent, each serving a different purpose. The nature and scope of the contracts were outlined, distinguishing between design and engineering and procurement and construction. The coordination agreement did not alter the work's nature, and the appellant's services were rightly classified under Consulting Engineering Service, warranting service tax payment.

5. The Tribunal noted the previous favorable judgments for the appellant, which had attained finality. Citing relevant case law, it held that the appellants were not liable to pay service tax under Consulting Engineering Services. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the legal judgment comprehensively, outlining the arguments presented by both parties and the Tribunal's final decision based on relevant legal principles and precedents.