Photography and material testing were not Consulting Engineer Service; notice was also quashed for lack of territorial jurisdiction.

An activity involving taking photographs or X-ray/Gamma-ray images of material and preparing reports from Pune was treated as photography/material testing with report preparation, not Consulting Engineer Service, so the service tax demand failed on merits. The notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Sangli was also held without territorial jurisdiction because the respondent's office, registration and place of service were at Pune. The impugned order was upheld, the revenue appeal was dismissed, and the cross-objection was disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the activity undertaken by the respondent was taxable as Consulting Engineer Service or was merely photography/material testing; (ii) Whether the show-cause notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Sangli was without territorial jurisdiction.

Issue (i): Whether the activity undertaken by the respondent was taxable as Consulting Engineer Service or was merely photography/material testing.

Analysis: The record showed that the respondent's work consisted of taking photographs or X-ray/Gamma-ray images of material and preparing reports based on those images from its Pune office. The activity was therefore found to be essentially photography/material testing with interpretation of the photographs, and not consultancy in engineering.

Conclusion: The activity was not Consulting Engineer Service and the service tax demand failed on merits.

Issue (ii): Whether the show-cause notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Sangli was without territorial jurisdiction.

Analysis: The respondent's office and registration were at Pune, and the service was held to have been provided from Pune. On those facts, the Sangli officer was held not to have territorial jurisdiction to issue the notice.

Conclusion: The show-cause notice was without territorial jurisdiction.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was upheld, the revenue appeal was dismissed, and the cross-objection was disposed of accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi: A service consisting of photography or material testing with report preparation is not Consulting Engineer Service, and a show-cause notice must be issued by the authority having territorial jurisdiction over the place where the service is provided.

---