Tribunal recalls Stay Order due to advocate's absence, dismisses Stay Application on service tax demand for power plant.

The Tribunal allowed the Miscellaneous Application to recall the Stay Order due to the advocate's absence. The Stay Application against the service tax demand for cleaning services provided to a power plant was dismissed, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the Revenue. The appellant was directed to pre-deposit the disputed service tax amount within six weeks, with a stay on recovery of remaining liabilities during the appeal. Failure to comply would result in appeal dismissal, emphasizing the commercial nature of the power plant's activities as the basis for the service tax liability.

---

---

Issues:
1. Miscellaneous Application seeking recall of the order dated 14.07.2015
2. Stay Application filed against Order-in-Appeal dated 17.12.2012 regarding service tax demand for cleaning services provided to a power plant

Analysis:
1. Miscellaneous Application:
The Miscellaneous Application was filed to recall the order dismissing the stay application and ordering pre-deposit of the assessed liability. The application cited the absence of the appellant's advocate due to typhoid, supported by medical records. The Tribunal allowed the application and recalled the Stay Order, emphasizing the reasonable ground justifying the advocate's absence.

2. Stay Application:
The appellant filed a stay application against an Order-in-Appeal upholding a service tax demand for providing cleaning services to a power plant. The appellant argued that the service was not provided to a commercial or industrial building, citing judgments from CESTAT cases. The Tribunal considered the contentions and determined that the power plant, being an electricity producer selling electricity at regulated prices, fell within the scope of cleaning services under relevant sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal distinguished previous cases cited by the appellant, emphasizing the commercial nature of the activity.

3. Decision:
After analyzing the contentions and precedents, the Tribunal found in favor of the Revenue, ordering pre-deposit of the entire disputed service tax amount within six weeks. The appellant was directed to report compliance by a specified date, with a stay on recovery of remaining liabilities during the appeal. Failure to comply would result in dismissal of the appeal. Any amount already deposited towards the service tax demand would be considered part of the pre-deposit. The decision highlighted the commercial nature of the power plant's activities, leading to the imposition of the service tax liability.

---