TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1560
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant's accounts, it was noticed that the appellant earned income by "refurbishing of cranes" during the period April 2008 to March 2012. The department being of the view that the said activity amounted to 'Management, maintenance or repair services' demanded service tax due thereon along with interest and proposed imposition of penalties. The SCN also demanded interest for belated payment of service tax during certain months of the aforesaid period. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demands as proposed along with appropriate interest thereon and imposed penalties. Appellant's appeal against the same was rejected by the appellate authority who upheld the demands as proposed along with appropriate interest and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellate Authority. Ld. A.R also submits that but for the audit conducted the evasion would not have come to light and hence the demands have been rightly confirmed by the appellate authority. 4. The issues that arise for consideration are whether the demand of service tax made on the appellant under the category of "Management, maintenance or repair' services as defined under Section 65(54) read with Section 65 (105) (zzg) is tenable on merits and also whether the demand is barred by limitation as contested by the appellant. 5. It is seen from the appeal records that for the relevant period the definition of 'management, maintenance or repair' service as defined in Section 65(64) is as follows: "management, maintenance or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Authority in the impugned Order in Appeal, has rendered a finding premised on the appellant's reply to the SCN, inter-alia, as under: " 7 (vi). According to appellant, 'refurbishing of cranes was done by us for a fully hydraulic, telescoping truck cranes, as well as for crawler cranes, crawler, under carriage, which are not registerable with RTO. (vide para 3.7.1 of their reply dated 27.09.2013 to show cause notice). Hence, applying the above ratio to the facts, as stated by the appellants, it is apparent that refurbished cranes are not motor vehicles. As they are not 'motor vehicles' they were admittedly not registered with RTO (Regional Transport Authority.) It is observed that sub clause (c) of clause (ii) of Section 65(64) exc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Thermal Power Project, are in entirely different facts and circumstances pertaining to a claim adjudged by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, were the rejection of the claim on the ground that the crane was not registered was not countenanced, finding that non-registration alone is insufficient to hold that the vehicle is not a motor vehicle. The decision in Bose Abraham was concerning Road Rollers and Excavators that were admittedly registered under the Motor Vehicles Act, and the dispute pertained to the entry tax under Kerala Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, the levy of which entry tax was contested on the ground that the excavators and road rollers were being put to use solely for the purposes of the owner in close....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tate against the ratio of the decisions of the Honourable Apex Court in Anand Nishikawa Co Ltd v CCE, 2005 (188) ELT 149 (SC) and Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Co v CCE, 1995 (78) ELT 401 (SC) cited by the appellant supra. This tribunal has time and again, reproducing the relevant Apex Court decisions in this regard, reiterated that in the absence of any evidence of any positive or deliberate act of wilful misstatement or suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellant, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked; one such recent reiteration being made in the recent Final Order No.40802/2025 dated 06.08.2025 in the case of M/s. Aam India Manufacturing Corporation Pvt Ltd. v. Commissioner of GST & Cen....