https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183657 Repairing, chipping, cleaning and painting of vessels were examined against the statutory concept of "port service" under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. The tribunal read section 42(e) in context and held that it could not be stretched to cover independent vessel repair work. It also noted that the charges were contract-negotiated rather than fixed by tariff or notification under section 42(4), which supported the view that the activity was not a routine authorised port service. The Board's power under section 35 to provide appliances and dry dock facilities was distinguished from the repair activity itself, and the work was held prima facie not liable to service tax, with unconditional stay granted. en-us Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Apr 2024 18:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183657 Repairing, chipping, cleaning and painting of vessels were examined against the statutory concept of "port service" under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. The tribunal read section 42(e) in context and held that it could not be stretched to cover independent vessel repair work. It also noted that the charges were contract-negotiated rather than fixed by tariff or notification under section 42(4), which supported the view that the activity was not a routine authorised port service. The Board's power under section 35 to provide appliances and dry dock facilities was distinguished from the repair activity itself, and the work was held prima facie not liable to service tax, with unconditional stay granted. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183657