https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446393 Fabrication, erection, replacement, cleaning and upkeep were held not to fall within management, maintenance or repair service on the facts stated, because replacement was treated as distinct from repair, fabrication of immovable property was treated as manufacturing activity, and periodic maintenance was not established. The service tax demand based on that classification was therefore unsustainable, and the related interest and penalty also could not survive. The notice and adjudication were additionally criticised for vagueness, as they did not clearly bifurcate the taxable value or match each work order to a specific service head; that lack of clear correlation further undermined the demand. en-us Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Dec 2023 08:43:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446393 Fabrication, erection, replacement, cleaning and upkeep were held not to fall within management, maintenance or repair service on the facts stated, because replacement was treated as distinct from repair, fabrication of immovable property was treated as manufacturing activity, and periodic maintenance was not established. The service tax demand based on that classification was therefore unsustainable, and the related interest and penalty also could not survive. The notice and adjudication were additionally criticised for vagueness, as they did not clearly bifurcate the taxable value or match each work order to a specific service head; that lack of clear correlation further undermined the demand. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446393