https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759782 Where draw texturizing machines were manufactured and sold as excisable goods, cleared in dismantled parts for transport convenience, the incidental erection and commissioning at the buyer's site was treated as part of the sale transaction and not a separate taxable service. No independent erection or installation charges were shown, and the full contract value had already suffered Central Excise duty, so service tax could not be levied on the same activity. The extended limitation period was also held inapplicable because the assessee was registered, had filed returns, and had disclosed the clearance and assembly facts to the department, with no wilful suppression or intent to evade tax. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Oct 2024 08:20:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759782 Where draw texturizing machines were manufactured and sold as excisable goods, cleared in dismantled parts for transport convenience, the incidental erection and commissioning at the buyer's site was treated as part of the sale transaction and not a separate taxable service. No independent erection or installation charges were shown, and the full contract value had already suffered Central Excise duty, so service tax could not be levied on the same activity. The extended limitation period was also held inapplicable because the assessee was registered, had filed returns, and had disclosed the clearance and assembly facts to the department, with no wilful suppression or intent to evade tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 01 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759782