TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Dispute over service tax liability for laying optical fibers under services; court emphasizes circular importance.</h1> <h3>M/s. Om Telelink Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Service Tax Ahmedabad</h3> M/s. Om Telelink Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Service Tax Ahmedabad - TMI Issues: Service tax liability on laying optical fibers under erection, commissioning, and installation services; Consideration of Board circular post personal hearing; Remand for fresh adjudication.Analysis:The judgment involves the issue of service tax liability on the laying of optical fibers by the appellant under the category of erection, commissioning, and installation services, brought into the service tax net from July 1, 2003. The appellant was demanded Rs. 1,81,060 as service tax, along with interest and penalties under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant contended that they were not liable to pay service tax before a certain date and referred to a circular issued by the Board, which clarified that laying cables under or alongside the road is not a taxable service under the mentioned category. The circular was not available at the time of the personal hearing, and the original adjudication order did not consider it. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the submission related to the circular, stating it was not the crux of the issue. The judgment emphasized that the liability before a specific date was contested, and the circular should have been considered as it related to the taxability of the service provided by the appellant.Furthermore, the judgment highlighted the importance of considering the Board circular, issued subsequent to the personal hearing, regarding the taxability of the service rendered by the appellant. The judgment concluded that if the service tax is not liable to be paid, the imposition of penalties and interest does not arise. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication. The requirement of pre-deposit of demanded amounts and penalties was waived, with all issues kept open for reconsideration. The original adjudicating authority was directed to thoroughly analyze the applicability of the Board circular to the activities undertaken by the appellant to determine the taxability of the service provided before proceeding further.Lastly, a doubt arose during the hearing regarding whether the issue could be considered by a single Member or not. Both parties agreed that the issue pertained to the taxability of the service, not classification, and thus could be decided by a single Member. Despite the completion of dictation, the judgment was passed to remand the matter for further adjudication, considering the nature of the service provided by the appellant and the applicability of the Board circular in detail.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
