2025-VIL-1897-CESTAT-HYD-ST
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-1897-CESTAT-HYD-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Classification of service – Appellant is constituent unit of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), carried out various projects on earth sciences and research, survey and exploration into mineral resources, etc. – Dept of the view that the service provided by the appellant are covered under the category of Scientific or Technical Consultancy Service (STC) and not Survey and Map Making (SMM) service - HELD - Department is claiming that activities undertaken by Appellant would specifically covered under category of STC, whereas Appellant is submitting that it would fall within ambit of SMM - While the service of SMM is restricted to carrying out survey and making maps and presenting the plain result of the same, however, in the same context, if any specific expert view or definite opinion, etc., are given by an expert or technocrat of this field, then it would not be covered under SMM - If an activity has to fall under STC, there has to be some element of consultation, expert advice or technical assistance. Appellant is a scientific institution and service is being provided by scientists and technocrats to carryout various activities, keeping in view the scope of work awarded to them by their clients. There is no dispute that Appellant is an expert body and for giving any opinion or advice, they have to carry out various surveys, map making, data analysis, etc. - Where the survey is of prime importance, a survey report or a map based on such survey would not have any element of any expert opinion - In so far as merit of demand on classification is concerned, the quantification of demand has to be based on above findings. However, the final demand, if any, would be dependent on decision by the adjudicating authority on the issue of limitation - Appeal allowed partly by way of remand - Denovo proceedings – Non-compliance of order – Whether Adjudicating Authority has complied with order passed by Tribunal – HELD – Impugned order has been passed in remand proceedings in terms of order passed by Tribunal. No findings have been given by Adjudicating Authority in his denovo proceedings on issue of limitation, though demand has been confirmed under proviso to Section 73 of the Act. While adjudicating authority had complied with order of Tribunal in so far as substantive issue on merit was concerned, he has not given any findings on plea of limitation as directed by Tribunal. Matter is remanded to Adjudicating authority to quantify demand based on merit of case and examine the issue of limitation.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C of FY24-25
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?