Case Law Details
Kumar Builders Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Chandigarh)
CESTAT Chandigarh held that activity of transportation and disposal of ash cannot be classified under taxable category of ‘Cleaning Services’. Accordingly, demand of service tax unsustainable.
Facts- Investigation by the Preventive Branch of Central Excise revealed that the appellants have provided services under the category of “Cleaning Activity”, “Maintenance or Repair”, “Management, Maintenance or Repair”, “Construction of Complex” and “Commercial or Industrial Construction” etc. and have not paid applicable service tax.
A show-cause notice was issued to the appellants and was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority vide impugned order. CESTAT vide Final Order No.57531/2013 dated 02.09.2013 rejected the appeal filed by the appellant for non-payment of pre-deposit; on an appeal filed by the appellant, Punjab & Haryana High Court vide Order dated 04.03.2015 dismissed the order of the Tribunal and directed the Tribunal to hear the appeal without payment of pre-deposit, of duty confirmed on the “Cleaning Service”, while directing the appellants to pre-deposit the amounts in respect of “Management, Maintenance and Repair”; CESTAT restored the appeal which is before us.
Conclusion- Kolkata Bench of Tribunal in the case of Calcutta Industrial Supply Corporation has held that the appellant is engaged for transportation and disposal of ash, in the abandoned mines. The letter does not show that the appellant was engaged for cleaning of the premises. Therefore, the demand of service tax under the category of Cleaning Service is not justified.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
