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>Tribunal grants full waiver and stay of recovery during appeal process for service tax dispute</h1> <h3>SURINDRA ENGINEERING CO. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MUMBAI</h3> SURINDRA ENGINEERING CO. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MUMBAI - 2012 (27) S.T.R. 77 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues:1. Classification of activity as 'erection, commissioning, and installation service' for service tax liability.2. Inclusion of value of goods supplied in service tax demand calculation.3. Financial hardship faced by the appellant.Issue 1: Classification of Activity for Service Tax LiabilityThe appellant, a manufacturer of pipes and service tax assessee, undertook activities related to water projects, including laying pipelines. The department claimed these activities fell under 'erection, commissioning, and installation service' for service tax purposes. The Commissioner confirmed a substantial duty demand, interest, and penalties. The appellant argued that similar cases had ruled in favor of not categorizing such activities under the mentioned service tax category. They contended that their activities constituted a works contract, not subject to service tax. The appellant also highlighted discrepancies in the Commissioner's calculation, including the inclusion of goods' value already taxed under VAT/Sales Tax. The appellant referenced legal precedents and circulars to support their position.Issue 2: Inclusion of Goods Value in Service Tax DemandThe appellant challenged the inclusion of goods' value in the service tax demand calculation, arguing that the value of goods already taxed under VAT/Sales Tax should be excluded. The appellant claimed that the Commissioner's failure to consider the value of services provided separately was a flaw in the order. The appellant's financial difficulties were also cited to emphasize the potential undue financial burden of any pre-deposit requirement.Issue 3: Financial HardshipThe appellant highlighted their significant accumulated losses, exceeding Rs. 38.00 crores, to demonstrate their financial distress. They requested a complete waiver of the pre-deposit of the dues adjudged due to their extreme financial difficulties. The appellant's financial situation was a crucial factor in the Tribunal's decision to grant a full waiver of the dues adjudged and stay the recovery during the appeal's pendency.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, granting a full waiver of the dues adjudged and staying the recovery during the appeal process. The decision was based on the appellant's prima facie case for not categorizing their activities under the 'erection, commissioning, and installation service' for service tax liability, the inclusion of goods' value in the tax demand calculation, and the appellant's severe financial hardship. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by legal precedents, circulars, and the appellant's financial circumstances.
TaxTMI 