TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 Upholds Service Tax on Consulting Engineering Services for Canal Project</h1> The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision to classify the appellant's activities under Consulting Engineering Services, holding them liable for ... Consulting Engineer Services - Held that:- Appellants are not disputing the activity. The appellants undertake the activity of survey, preparation of plan and estimate of canal and distribution under a composite work order - survey and map making service has come into the service tax net from 16.6.2005. Hence the demands relates one of the activities of map making service under the composite work order which is for survey, design, preparation of plan etc therefore we find no infirmity in the impugned order - Decided against assessee. Issues:- Appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) upholding demands of service tax for activities undertaken by the appellant.- Classification of the activity under Consulting Engineering Services.- Liability of service tax for survey and map-making services.- Applicability of service tax for activities pre and post 16.06.2005.Analysis:1. The appellant contested the demand of service tax imposed for activities related to construction of dams and canals, arguing that the survey service was not provided to any external party. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) classified the activity under Consulting Engineering Services based on the nature of work undertaken for a specific project, which involved survey, design, and preparation of plans for a canal project in Madhya Pradesh.2. The Circular No. B.43/5/97-TRU clarified that activities involving feasibility study reports fall under Consulting Engineering Services. The Commissioner held that the appellant's work for the Upper Beda Project fell under this category, making it liable for service tax. Despite survey being an independent service, in this composite agreement, the amount for survey could not be separated, leading to the imposition of service tax on the entire service.3. The appellant presented the tender document for the project, which confirmed the nature of work as survey, design, and planning, contracted to qualified consulting firms. The definition of 'Consulting Engineer' under Section 65 of the Finance Act includes professionals providing engineering advice or consultancy, aligning with the services rendered by the appellant in this case.4. It was established that the appellant did not dispute undertaking survey and planning activities for canal construction under a composite work order. The imposition of service tax was justified as the service of survey and map-making came under the service tax regime effective from 16.06.2005. Therefore, the demand for service tax for activities falling within the scope of map-making services was deemed valid by the Tribunal.5. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commissioner's decision on the classification of services under Consulting Engineering Services and the liability for service tax on the survey and map-making activities conducted as part of the composite work order. The judgment emphasized the applicability of service tax for activities post the specified date, ensuring compliance with the relevant provisions of the Finance Act.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal arguments, interpretations, and conclusions reached by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI regarding the issues raised in the appeal against the imposition of service tax for specific activities undertaken by the appellant.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
