9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,600/- under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 as per the Revision Order No. 4/2006 dated 9-8-2006 of the Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai. The impugned order was passed on revision of Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Com missioner of Service tax whereby he had dropped proposal to demand service tax from RPAL for consulting engineer's service rendered by them during the period 1998-99 to 2000-01. The original authority had found that the applicant had rendered only the service of testing of materials and had not rendered engineering consultancy service as proposed in the Show Cause Notice. In the impugned order, the Commissioner found that the applicants had rendered taxable service falling under the category of consulting en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivate Limited and also to provide services such as periodical testing of raw materials, finished products, exercising quality control, maintenance of machinery of BCPL for manufacturing dry cement paints etc. The agreement had indicated that the appellants were providing 'Consulting Engineer' service to BCPL during the material period and they had failed to register themselves with the Department and to pay the duty due for the services rendered. The demand was not barred by limitation. 4. I have carefully considered the case records and the submissions made by both sides. The appellants had entered into the following agreement with Brilliant Coatings Pvt. Ltd. on 19-8-1996. "After discussion and deliberations between us, it was re-co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ining machinery of BCPL used in the manufacture of dry cement paints. Obviously, the service rendered involved knowledge of engineering and the services appear to be engineering consultancy. However, the adjudicating authority has not met the challenge raised by the appellants in the reply to the Show Cause Notice to the effect that the appellants did not conform to the definition of 'Consulting Engineer' in the Act. They were neither provisionally qualified engineers nor were they a firm of engineers, rendering engineering consultancy service. In the circumstances, I find that the matter has to go back to the Commissioner to examine whether the appellants satisfy the statutory definition of Consulting Engineer. It is essential that the fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
