Management, maintenance or repair service classification prevails where activities do not qualify as horticulture activity.

Activities performed by the appellant were treated as falling within the amended scope of "management, maintenance or repair" under the Finance Act, 1994, and therefore within the taxable service provisions in Sections 65(64) and 65(105)(zzg). On the nature of the obligations actually undertaken, the activities did not qualify as "horticulture activity" and could not be excluded from tax on that basis. The show cause notice was accordingly considered properly issued, and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant's activities fell within the scope of "management, maintenance or repair" under the Finance Act, 1994, or could be treated as "horticulture activity" so as to fall outside the taxable service.

Analysis: The activities undertaken by the appellant were found to be covered by the amended definition of "management, maintenance or repair" and the corresponding taxable service provisions in Sections 65(64) and 65(105)(zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994. On the nature of the obligations performed, the activities did not answer to the expression "horticulture activity". The show cause notice was therefore held to have been rightly issued.

Conclusion: The challenge failed and the appeal was dismissed.

---