2018 (4) TMI 771 - AT - Service Tax

Technical Inspection and Certification Services - Appellants provide certification of electrical appliances and approve the energy efficiency reading of these appliances - whether or not the assessee-Appellants have discharged the statutory obligation in pursuance to the Act of Parliament and the Regulations framed thereunder? - Held that - the assessee-Appellants did discharge the statutory obligations mandated under the law. The fee collected in various forms is also pre-notified and fixed by the authority as per law. The mention of the original authority that the Regulation is option al for the manufacturer s is erroneous. The Regulation makes it mandatory for such labeling. The assessee-Appellants, acting in pursuance to the statutory regulations, collected statutorily fixed fee for such performance, cannot be subjected to Service Tax. Appeal allowed - decided in favor appellant-assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the fee collected by the organization working under the Ministry of Power, Government of India for providing certification of electrical appliances is liable to Service Tax under the category of 'Technical Inspection and Certification Services' as per the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:
The Appellants, an organization under the Ministry of Power, collect Processing Fee and Labeling Fee for certifying electrical appliances' energy efficiency. The Revenue contended that this fee is liable to Service Tax under 'Technical Inspection and Certification Services.' The original authority upheld the tax liability and imposed penalties under the Finance Act.

The Appellants argued that their activities are in compliance with statutory obligations under the Energy Conservation Act, 2001 and relevant Regulations. They asserted that when discharging statutory duties, Service Tax should not apply, especially when there is no service provider and recipient regulation in the Statutory Act. They emphasized that labeling of appliances is mandatory under the Regulations, and non-compliance leads to penalties.

The Revenue maintained that the amount collected for statutory acts should be credited to the Government treasury, citing a Board clarification. However, the Tribunal found that the Appellants fulfilled their statutory obligations under the Act and Regulations. The fee collected was pre-notified and fixed by the authority as per law, and the labeling requirement was mandatory, not optional for manufacturers.

The Tribunal concluded that the Appellants, acting in compliance with statutory regulations, collected fees for performance mandated by law. As such, they could not be subjected to Service Tax liability for providing certification services. The impugned order was deemed legally unsustainable, and the appeal by the Appellants was allowed. The fee collected was to be deposited in a designated fund for organizational expansion, under the direct control of the Ministry of Power.

In summary, the Tribunal held that the fee collected by the Appellants for certifying electrical appliances' energy efficiency was not subject to Service Tax as they were fulfilling statutory obligations. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order imposing tax liability and penalties.