Consulting engineer definition was narrowly construed, excluding a non-engineering entity that only rendered occasional technical advice.

A non-engineering commercial entity that merely employed engineers or occasionally rendered technical advice was not a consulting engineer for service tax purposes. The taxing definition was confined to a professionally qualified engineer or an engineering firm, and the entity's character had to be judged by its ordinary business identity rather than by incidental consultancy receipts. On that construction, the service tax demand was not sustainable, and the related penalty challenge failed consequentially.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a manufacturer who rendered technical consultancy but was not itself an engineering firm could be treated as a consulting engineer for service tax purposes under the relevant statutory definition.

Analysis: The definition of consulting engineer then in force covered only a professionally qualified engineer or an engineering firm. A firm does not become an engineering firm merely because it employs engineers or occasionally renders engineering-related advice. The character of the entity has to be judged by its identity and ordinary business, and not by a stray consultancy receipt or by incidental employment of engineers. The taxing provision was therefore required to be construed according to its text, and a broader meaning could not be imposed in the absence of clear language.

Conclusion: The assessee was not a consulting engineer or engineering firm and the service tax demand was not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The demand of service tax failed, and the challenge to penalty also failed as a consequence.

Ratio Decidendi: For the relevant service tax levy, only a professionally qualified engineer or an engineering firm fell within the charging definition, and a non-engineering commercial entity did not become an engineering firm merely because it employed engineers or rendered occasional technical consultancy.

---