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 rules fly ash removal not 'Cleaning Services' under Finance Act.</h1> <h3>M/s Marshall Corporation Ltd., Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Kolkata.</h3> M/s Marshall Corporation Ltd., Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Kolkata. - TMI Issues:The issue involves the classification of services provided by the Appellant to M/s CESC Ltd as either 'Cleaning Services' liable to service tax or as GTA services where the tax liability is on the service recipient.Summary:The Appellant, registered under the category of GTA services, entered into an agreement with M/s CESC Ltd for evacuating fly ash from silos and hydro bins. The Department contended that this activity falls under 'Cleaning Services' as per Section 65(24b) of the Finance Act, 1994. A Notice demanding service tax was issued, leading to a confirmed demand by the Additional Commissioner. The Commissioner's Revision Order upheld the demand, leading to the Appellant's appeal.In the Revision Order, the Department argued that the cleaning/evacuation of tank/reservoir falls under the definition of 'Cleaning Activity' as per the Finance Act. The Appellant argued that the fly ash removed has commercial utility and is not dirt, hence not constituting 'cleaning'.After hearing both sides, the Tribunal observed that the Appellant's activity of evacuating fly ash does not align with the definition of 'Cleaning Activity' as per the Finance Act. The Tribunal referenced a previous decision and highlighted that fly ash, being saleable and having commercial utility, does not constitute waste. Thus, the Tribunal held that the activities undertaken by the Appellant are not chargeable to service tax under the category of 'Cleaning Service'.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled that the Appellant's activities do not fall under the category of 'cleaning service' as defined in the Finance Act, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal filed by the Appellant with consequential relief, if any.
TaxTMI 