2009 (8) TMI 337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er dismissing the stay application, we take up the appeal. 2. In the impugned order, the issue considered by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was whether the appellant company, successor to Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB), was rendering taxable service in the nature of "consulting engineers service" to the consumers of electrical energy during the period of dispute (April, 2000 to March, 2005). There were two schemes of distribution of energy by the appellants during the material period. In one scheme, the appellant-company themselves installed the necessary infrastructure for supply of electricity to consumers after collecting a contribution from the latter (lump-sum method). In the other scheme known as "outright contribut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing authority for fresh consideration had been withdrawn with effect from 11-5-2001 and that, after the said date, the Commissioner (Appeals) continued to exercise the powers of the adjudicating authority in matters of assessment. In the present case, the substantive issue considered by the lower appellate authority was whether, during the period of dispute, the appellant was rendering 'consulting engineers service' to the consumers of electricity. On this issue, the appellate authority, after examining the records, held that service tax was leviable in respect of the technical advice, inspection, testing of equipment and materials etc., rendered by the appellant to the consumers who executed the work of installing the infrastructure for di....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gineering, including the discipline of computer hardware engineering. It is not in dispute that, in the outright contribution scheme, the electrical engineers of the appellant had rendered advice, consultancy and technical supervision for the consumers to install the necessary infrastructure for distribution of electricity. Admittedly, the infrastructure was brought in place at the cost of the consumers. It has therefore to be held that the service rendered by the appellant through their electrical engineers to the consumers of electricity fell within the ambit of "taxable service" under section 65(105)(g) of the Finance Act, 1994. It goes without saying that the electrical engineers of the appellant were acting as "consulting engineers" wi....