CESTAT upholds Commissioner's decision on service classification appeal, rejects Revenue's claim of suppression.

The CESTAT, Bangalore, upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision in an appeal by the Revenue regarding the classification of services as Mandap Keeper or convention services. The tribunal found no justification for reclassification after six years and rejected the Revenue's claim of suppression. The Commissioner's order was supported by a Board's letter and Supreme Court decisions. The appeal was allowed on limitation grounds, with the tribunal dismissing the Revenue's appeal for lacking merit. The impugned order was upheld as correct and legal, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

---

---

The appellate tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, consisting of Members T.K. Jayaraman and M.V. Ravindran, heard an appeal filed by the Revenue against an order related to service tax. The case involved the classification of services provided by the respondent as either Mandap Keeper services or convention services. The Revenue contended that the services should be classified as convention services, while the respondent argued they fell under Mandap Keeper services. The investigation revealed that the respondent had stopped paying service tax under the Mandap Keeper category and had availed of an exemption under Notification No. 12/01. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty under convention services, but the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order, leading to the appeal.

Regarding the issue of limitation, the Commissioner (Appeals) found no justification for reclassification after six years, as the respondent had been assessed under Mandap Keeper services for a decade. The Revenue's claim of suppression was weak, and the Commissioner's order was deemed correct. On the merits, the Commissioner (Appeals) cited a Board's letter and Supreme Court decisions supporting the appellant's position. The circular dated 2003 was to be applied prospectively, and the appeal was allowed based on limitation grounds. The tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, rejecting the Revenue's appeal as lacking merit. The impugned order was deemed correct and legal, and the appeal was dismissed.

---