Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Service Tax

CESTAT Sets Aside Service Tax Demand on Railway Cleaning Services as Exempt & Time-Barred

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2026 taxguru.in 9625
Case Name
Khagaul Loco Labour Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement

Khagaul Loco Labour Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)

The appeal arose from Order-in-Original No. 06/ST/Commissioner/2018 dated 25.04.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Patna, confirming service tax demand of Rs. 4,88,53,567, along with interest, equal penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, and penalties under Sections 76 and 77, for the period 2009-10 to 2013-14. The appellant, a co-operative society, had provided cleaning-related services to Indian Railways, including mechanised and manual station cleaning, coach cleaning, onboard housekeeping, toilet cleaning, and bedroll distribution.

The show cause notice classified railway station and coach cleaning services as “Cleaning Service” and onboard housekeeping activities as “Business Auxiliary Service”, alleging service tax liability on both categories.

The appellant contended that an identical issue had already been decided in its favour by CESTAT in an earlier proceeding and relied upon the Tribunal’s decision in M/s. Bindhya Bashini Traders v Commissioner of C.G.S.T. and Central Excise. It submitted that cleaning services rendered to Indian Railways were not taxable as “Cleaning Service” prior to 01.07.2012, while for the period after 01.07.2012, such services were exempt under Entry No. 25 of Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. Regarding the Business Auxiliary Service demand for the period before 01.07.2012, the appellant argued that the Department had already issued an earlier show cause notice on the same activities, and therefore the extended period of limitation could not be invoked again, relying upon Nizam Sugar Factory v Collector of Central Excise, A.P.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 19,970

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.