Case Law Details

Case Name : SAIL Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Ranchi (CESTAT Kolkata)
Appeal Number : Order No. M-268/KOL of 2012/5-545/KOL of 2012
Date of Judgement/Order : 18/06/2012
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All CESTAT (964) CESTAT Kolkata (25)




Commissioner of Central Excise, Ranchi

ORDER NO. M-268/KOL of 2012/5-545/KOL of 2012

MA – 168 of 2012 & SP – 311 of 2010

APPEAL NO. st/115 of 2010

JUNE 18, 2012


S.K. Gaule, Technical Member 

Heard both sides. The Applicant filed this application for changing Cause Title from M/s SAIL to M/s Centre for Engineering & Technology. The contention is that M/s Centre for Engineering & Technology is a unit of M/s SAIL. In these circumstances, the miscellaneous application for change of Cause Title is allowed and the application for stay is taken up for disposal.

2. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs. 12.68 crore and equal amount of penalty under section 78 and other penalties under section 76, 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The contention of the applicant is a unit of M/s SAIL (India) are providing consulting engineering services to various clients/persons. Insofar as the service tax on the service provided to outsiders, they are paying service and insofar as the service provided in in-house, the contention is that they are all units/branches of M/s SAIL. The contention is that they are the unit of M/s SAIL which is evident from the registration issued to them. The contention is that ST-3 returns also show service registration in which PAN form part. They have also produced a copy of the registration certificate issued by the Central Excise Officers indicating PAN Number of M/s SAIL. The contention is that the service provided to self cannot be charged. In support of their contention, they have placed reliance of the Tribunal’s decision in the cases of M/s Precot Mills Ltd. v. CCE [2006] 5 STT 35 (Tri.-Bang.) & Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE [2009] 22 STT 15 (Kol. – CESTAT).

3. The contention of the ld. A.R. for the Department is that there is an allocation of fund between the applicant and the other units to whom the service is provided. The contention is that the applicant is issuing debit note towards the value of services.

4. In his rejoinder, the Id. Advocate for the applicant contended that the debit notes raised are for the allocation of fund to assess the expenditure incurred by them and this does not change the nature of the service provided by them to self.

5. We find from the Central Excise Registration and the other documents furnished by the applicant that the Registration by Central Excise Department has been given by including PAN Number of SAIL. There is no dispute that the applicant is an unit of M/s SAIL and the other units are also part of M/s SAIL. Thus, we find that the service is being provided to self, this Tribunal in the case of Precot Mills (supra) and also in the case of Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. (supra), held that the service provided to self is not liable to service tax. In these circumstances, we find that the applicants are able to make out a prima facie case for total waiver of pre-deposit in their favour. Therefore, the requirement of pre-deposit of all dues adjudged is waived and recovery of the same is stayed during pendency of the appeal. Stay petition is allowed. Miscellaneous application is disposed of.


More Under Service Tax


  1. Manan says:

    Dear guruji,

    Is it necessary to take service tax no. for UNIT-2 ,situated at different place in same area and same type of manufacturing, if we had already taken Service tax no. fro the parent unit-1 of the same PAN no.We have alrady take ECC No. for both unit.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *