Strict construction of service tax exemptions bars street light maintenance claims and denied reliance on an omitted exemption entry.

An exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax was not available for street light maintenance because paragraph 13(a) covers maintenance of a road, bridge, tunnel or terminal for road transportation, and the plain wording did not extend to street light supporting structures. Exemption under paragraph 12(a) was also unavailable because that entry had already been omitted by Notification No. 6/2015-Service Tax. The ruling applied a strict construction of exemption notifications and confirmed that no benefit can be claimed beyond the text of the operative exemption entry.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether street light maintenance services fell within paragraph 13(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated 20.06.2012 as services in relation to a road, bridge, tunnel or terminal for road transportation for use by the general public; (ii) Whether the applicant could claim exemption under paragraph 12(a) of the same notification despite its omission by Notification No. 6/2015-Service Tax dated 01.03.2015.

Issue (i): Whether street light maintenance services fell within paragraph 13(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated 20.06.2012 as services in relation to a road, bridge, tunnel or terminal for road transportation for use by the general public.

Analysis: Paragraph 13(a) applies to construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation or alteration of a road, bridge, tunnel or terminal for road transportation. Street light maintenance is not maintenance of any such specified facility. The expression "road" was held not to include street light supporting structure, and the exemption could not be expanded beyond the plain language of the notification.

Conclusion: The applicant was not entitled to rely on paragraph 13(a), and the claim under that provision failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant could claim exemption under paragraph 12(a) of Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated 20.06.2012 despite its omission by Notification No. 6/2015-Service Tax dated 01.03.2015.

Analysis: Paragraph 12(a), on which the applicant relied, had already been omitted by Notification No. 6/2015-Service Tax dated 01.03.2015. Once the exemption provision stood omitted, no exemption could be claimed for the proposed service under that clause.

Conclusion: The applicant could not claim exemption under paragraph 12(a), and no exemption from service tax was available.

Final Conclusion: The application for advance ruling failed because the proposed service did not fall within the pleaded exemption entries and the relevant exemption provision had ceased to operate.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification must be construed according to its plain language, and exemption cannot be claimed once the relied-upon entry is inapplicable or has been omitted.

---