2017 (10) TMI 284 - AT - Service Tax

Classification of services - Commercial or Industrial Construction Services (CICS) or Completion & Finishing Services? - abatement under N/N. 15/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004 as amended by N/N. 19/2005-ST dated 07.06.2005 - Held that - the period involved is prior to 01.06.2007 - The activity of finishing and completion services is a subcategory of main service which is CICS - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Classification of services under 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Services' (CICS) for service tax abatement.
2. Applicability of Notification No. 15/2004-ST and Notification No. 19/2005-ST.
3. Interpretation of 'Finishing & Completion Services' in relation to CICS.
4. Validity of demand for differential service tax, interest, and penalty.
5. Precedential value of Commissioner Vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. judgment.

Analysis:
1. The appellants, registered under CICS, engaged in installing Structural Glazing for buildings and claimed service tax abatement under Notification No. 15/2004-ST. The Department contended the activity fell under 'Completion & Finishing Services,' disputing their eligibility for abatement. A Show Cause Notice demanded a differential amount of service tax, interest, and penalty. The original authority and the appellate authority upheld the demand, leading to the current appeal.

2. During the hearing, the appellant's counsel cited the Commissioner Vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. judgment, arguing its applicability to the current case, given the period predating 01.06.2007. The Assistant Commissioner reiterated the findings of the impugned order, maintaining the stance against the appellant.

3. The Tribunal considered the appellant's payment of service tax under CICS with abatement under Notification No. 15/2004-ST. The dispute centered on whether the services provided by the appellants should be classified under 'Finishing & Completion Services,' a subcategory of CICS. Relying on the Larsen & Toubro Ltd. judgment, the Tribunal concluded that the period falling before 01.06.2007 warranted the application of the aforementioned precedent.

4. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and any consequential reliefs. The decision was based on the classification of services and the applicability of relevant notifications, ultimately leading to the rejection of the demand for differential service tax, interest, and penalty.

5. The judgment's reliance on the Commissioner Vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. case highlights the significance of precedent in determining the tax liability of entities engaged in construction-related services. By aligning with established legal interpretations, the Tribunal provided clarity on the classification and taxation of services under CICS, emphasizing the importance of historical judicial decisions in resolving tax disputes effectively.