Tribunal upholds Commissioner's decisions on cleaning & catering services, denies abatement due to lack of evidence.

The Tribunal dismissed both appeals, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decisions on the demand for cleaning services and the eligibility of abatement for outdoor catering services. The hospital was deemed a non-commercial building due to lack of evidence, leading to the rejection of the service tax demand. The assessee's failure to comply with Notification 1/2006 conditions resulted in the denial of abatement benefits for outdoor catering services. Compliance with notification requirements and providing substantial evidence were crucial factors in the Tribunal's decision.

---

---

Issues:
Demand of service tax on cleaning services
Eligibility of abatement under Notification 1/2006 for outdoor catering services

Analysis:
1. Demand of service tax on cleaning services:
The case involved the assessee providing cleaning services to a hospital, with the department claiming the hospital to be a commercial concern due to patient fees. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand, citing the hospital as a non-commercial building. The Tribunal supported this decision, emphasizing the lack of evidence proving the hospital's commercial nature. The hospital's approval under the Income Tax Act and absence of evidence on patient fee collection supported the non-commercial status, leading to the dismissal of the department's appeal.

2. Eligibility of abatement under Notification 1/2006 for outdoor catering services:
Regarding the abatement issue, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand for the normal period due to the violation of conditions in Notification 1/2006. The Tribunal upheld this decision, noting the assessee's improper availing of CENVAT credit on common input services for outdoor catering. The violation of notification conditions rendered the assessee ineligible for abatement benefits, resulting in the dismissal of both the assessee's and department's appeals.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decisions on the demand for cleaning services and the eligibility of abatement for outdoor catering services. The judgment highlighted the importance of complying with notification conditions and providing substantial evidence to support claims, ultimately upholding the original decisions in both issues.

---