9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 432X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igible to Service Tax and accordingly, did not take Service Tax Registration. Subsequently, in view of the Circular dated 03.05.2013 issued by the South Eastern Railways and their subsequent letter dated 03.06.2013, the appellant obtained Service Tax Registration on 01.10.2013 and started paying Service Tax under the category of 'works contract service' and filed Returns under the said category. 1.1. The appellant came to know through their business sources that the services rendered by them are not liable to Service Tax, either prior to 30.06.2012 or after 01.07.2012. Accordingly, they stopped paying Service Tax and filed 'nil' Returns for the period from October 2014 to March 2015 indicating that they were not liable to pay Service Tax in view of Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012 [Sl. No. 25]. Subsequently, on 14.07.2016, the appellant received a letter from the Eastern Railways clarifying that as per Sl. No. 25 of Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. dated 20.06.2012, services provided by them to the Railways such as cleaning of railway stations, platforms, rag picking, etc., were exempted from the levy of Service Tax as per Sl. No. 25 of Notification No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere states that the service being performed have to be performed in a 'public area' and then only an assessee shall be eligible to enjoy the benefits of the notification. The said notification only states that for availing the benefit of the exemption notification, the activity is required to be performed in relation to any function ordinarily entrusted to a municipality in relation to water supply, public health, sanitation conservancy, solid waste management and to provide it to an entity which is classifiable under the category of Government, a local authority or a Governmental authority. (iii) The appellant has rendered services in the nature of 'upkeep/maintenance of platforms', 'dry sweeping of empty rakes and mechanized yard cleaning', 'Railway platform cleaning', 'disposal of accumulated garbage to designated places', 'On-board housekeeping service in reserved coaches of Poorva Express ' and 'cleaning of Sonpur Railway Station platform and its surrounding area'. Thus the first part of the Notification stands fulfilled. (iv) The services in question were rendered to the Indian Railways which as per Wikipedia is under the 100% ownership of Ministry of Railways, Go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned services, the confirmation of the demands does not survive. (ix) The appellant submitted that when the demand itself does not survive, there is no question of imposition of any penalty either on the company itself or on any of its partners. 4.1. The appellant also submits that the Show Cause Notice has raised the demand under the category of "cleaning service" as defined under Section 65(105)(zzzd) read with Section 65(24b) of the Finance Act, 1994. It is contended that a reading of the above Section makes it clear that Service Tax is leviable only in respect of cleaning activities undertaken with respect to objects or premises, of commercial or industrial buildings and premises thereof; or factory, plant or machinery, tank or reservoir of such commercial or industrial buildings and premises thereof; In the present case, the appellant are cleaning railway coaches, platforms, etc., running on the track and which are all properties of the Indian Railways and as such, the premises involved cannot be considered to be 'commercial' or 'industrial' in nature. Accordingly, the appellant submits that the activity undertaken by them is not liable to Service Tax under the category ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce in reserved coaches of Poorva Express' and 'cleaning of Sonpur Railway Station platform and its surrounding area', to the South Eastern Railways. The demand in this case has been raised for the period from 2012-13 to 2015-16. 7.1. We find that for the period up to 30.06.2012, the Department seeks to classify the services rendered by the appellant under the category of "cleaning service", as defined under Section 65(105)(zzzd) read with Section 65(24b) of the Finance Act, 1994. The said definition is reproduced below for the sake of ready reference: - "SECTION 65. Definitions. - In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, - ..... (24b) "cleaning activity" means cleaning, including specialised cleaning services such as disinfecting, exterminating or sterilising of objects or premises, of - (i) commercial or industrial buildings and premises thereof; or (ii) factory, plant or machinery, tank or reservoir of such commercial or industrial buildings and premises thereof, but does not include such services in relation to agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry or dairying;" 7.2. From the definition as reproduced above, it is observed that the 'cleaning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... railway coaches and contracts constituents of capital assets and machinery of Indian railway, the original authority held cleaning of such railway coaches will be considered as cleaning of commercial premises. The coaches are rolling stock of railways. They are for transport mode and cannot fall under the commercial object of industrial building, factory, plant or machinery, etc. The interpretation of the original authority is far fetched and not sustainable in view of the plain meaning of the statutory definition for tax entry." 7.3. A similar view has also been taken in the decision rendered in the case of P. Siva Prasad v Commissioner of C.Ex., Cus. & S.T., Hyderabad-III [2019 (27) G.S.T.L. 233 (Tri-Hyd.)]. The relevant part of the said Order is reproduced below: - "13. We now deal with the above issues and decide - (a) Supply of bed rolls under the head 'business auxiliary services' .......... (b) Cleaning of toilets and compartments : It is the case of the Revenue that these services are chargeable to service tax under the head 'cleaning services' under Section 65(24b) read with Section 65(105)(zzzd) of the Finance Act, 1994 while it is the case of the assessee appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax on the cleaning services." 7.4. In view of the above, we hold that the demand of Service Tax confirmed in the impugned order for the period up to 30.06.2012 under the category of "cleaning service" is not sustainable and hence we set aside the same. 8. In respect of the demand of Service Tax for the period after 01.07.2012, we find that there is a reference in the Show Cause Notice that the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax after 01.07.2012 under Section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994. However, in the impugned order, the ld. adjudicating authority has not given any finding in respect of the liability of the appellant to Service Tax for the period after 01.07.2012 as per Section 66B. We find that the ld. adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand of Service Tax for the entire period covered in the Show Cause Notice under "cleaning service" and has held that it is liable to Service Tax as per the definition provided under Section 65(105)(zzzd) of the said Act. We observe that the provisions quoted by the ld. adjudicating authority are applicable only up to 30.06.2012. For the period after 01.07.2012, the ld. adjudicating authority has not given any finding as to how the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a 8.2. supra, we find that the services provided to the Government which are in the nature of services ordinarily rendered by a municipality such as water supply, public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management are, inter alia, are exempted from Service Tax by virtue of the above said Notification. In this case, there is no dispute that the appellant has rendered the services namely, 'upkeep/maintenance of platforms', 'dry sweeping of empty rakes and mechanized yard cleaning', 'railway platform cleaning', 'disposal of accumulated garbage to designated placed', 'on-board housekeeping service in reserved coaches of Poorva Express' and 'cleaning of Sonpur Railway Station platform and its surrounding area' to a Government body viz. the Indian Railways. We find that the services rendered by the appellant are in the nature of "public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management". Entry No.25 of the Notification 25/2012-ST exempts all such services which are rendered to Government, as the same are otherwise exempted from service tax when rendered by a Municipality. Accordingly, we find that the services rendered by the appellant are squarely covered within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to evade the tax established. Accordingly, we hold that extended period of limitation is not invocable in this case. This view has been held by this Tribunal in the case of Munna Construction v Commissioner of C.Ex& S.T., Jamshedpur [Final Order No. 77625 of 2024 dated 22.11.2024 in Service Tax Appeal No. 76359 of 2014 (CESTAT, Kolkata)]. 9.1. We also find that the appellant, being a contractor engaged by the Indian Railways, took registration and paid Service Tax upon being advised by the Indian Railways. Thus, it is not a case where the appellant has collected and not paid the Service Tax to the Department. It is a case where the appellant had entertained a doubt as to their Service Tax liability and were firmly of the view that the services rendered were exempt as per Sl. No. 25 of Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. Therefore, there is no suppression of facts with intention to evade the tax on the part of the appellant existing in this case. Hence, the demand of Service Tax by invocation of the extended period of limitation is not sustainable. For the same reason no penalty imposable on the appellant. 10. In view of the above discussions, we hold that the services rendered by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
