Erection and commissioning services are not consulting engineer services where the work is executive rather than advisory.

Erection and commissioning services, being executive in nature rather than advisory, were held to be distinct from consulting engineer services for service tax purposes. Applying the earlier Yokogawa Blue Star Ltd. reasoning and treating the Board Circular as binding, the tribunal concluded that such services do not fall within the ambit of consulting engineer services. The revenue appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether services relating to erection and commissioning are taxable as consulting engineer services for service tax purposes.

Analysis: The service rendered was found to be of an executive nature, whereas consulting engineer service is advisory in character. The earlier bench decision in Yokogawa Blue Star Ltd., which had considered the Board Circular on the subject, held that erection and commissioning do not fall within consulting engineer services. The same reasoning was applied, and the Board Circular was treated as binding on the authorities.

Conclusion: Erection and commissioning services do not fall within the ambit of consulting engineer services, and the revenue appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Erection and commissioning work, being executive in nature, is distinct from advisory consulting engineer services and is not taxable under that head.

---