Exemption for repair services depends on the underlying activity, not merely tax paid on part of the receipts.

Maintenance and repair services rendered to the Indian Navy were treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 31/2010-ST, and collection and payment of service tax on part of the receipts did not by itself defeat the exemption where the underlying activity otherwise fell within the notification. For services rendered to other vessels, the claim for exemption on the value attributable to spares and components required fresh factual examination because the record suggested a possible bifurcation between service value and goods value, and the matter had not been properly tested on merits. The unresolved portion was remanded for reconsideration on evidence after affording the assessee an opportunity to support its claim.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether maintenance and repair services rendered to the Indian Navy were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 31/2010-ST dated 22.06.2010 notwithstanding collection and payment of service tax on a portion of the receipts; (ii) Whether the value attributable to spares/components in services rendered to other vessels could qualify for exemption under Notification No. 12/2003-ST and required fresh adjudication.

Issue (i): Whether maintenance and repair services rendered to the Indian Navy were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 31/2010-ST dated 22.06.2010 notwithstanding collection and payment of service tax on a portion of the receipts.

Analysis: The exemption was denied on the premise that service tax had been collected and paid on part of the gross receipts. The Tribunal held that mere collection and remittance of tax on a portion of the amount did not, by itself, disentitle the assessee from exemption if the underlying activity was otherwise covered by the notification. The services rendered to the Indian Navy fell within the exempted category, and the contrary view could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The assessee was held entitled to exemption for maintenance and repair services rendered to the Indian Navy.

Issue (ii): Whether the value attributable to spares/components in services rendered to other vessels could qualify for exemption under Notification No. 12/2003-ST and required fresh adjudication.

Analysis: For the remaining services, the records indicated a possible bifurcation between service value and the value of spares used in repair. As the adjudicating authority had not examined this aspect on merits and the assessee was to be afforded an opportunity to produce supporting evidence, the matter required reconsideration. Fresh verification was directed so that the claim could be assessed on proper evidence and in accordance with natural justice.

Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication.

Final Conclusion: The exemption claim was accepted for services rendered to the Indian Navy, while the remaining disputes were sent back for reconsideration on evidence and after giving due opportunity to the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: An assessee is not denied exemption merely because some service tax was collected and paid on part of the receipts if the underlying activity is otherwise exempt, and unresolved exemption claims requiring factual verification must be decided afresh on evidence after observing natural justice.

---