|
Court :
Brief : :
Citation :
Judgment :
‘Consulting engineer’ is defined as
‘any professionally qualified engineer or an engineering
firm who, either directly or indirectly, renders any
advice, consultancy ….’. The Court did not accept the
contention that the levy confines only to individual and
partnership firm and that incorporated companies are
excluded. Tax being on the service provided, the Act
made no distinction between different categories of
service providers, be they individuals, partnership
concerns or incorporated companies. It is fairly well
settled that where the language of a statute in its
ordinary meaning leads to a manifest anomaly or
contradiction, the Court is entitled to put upon it a
construction which modifies the meaning of the words
used in the same – Tata Consultancy Services v. Union of
India 2001 (130) ELT 726 (Kar.)
Amount paid to geologists for soil analysis to be
treated as integral part of consideration collected for
technical advice, results of soil analysis being used by
the assessee for advising their clients as to whether
their land fit for building construction – Atlanta v.
Commissioner 2005 (179) ELT 455 (Tri. Chennai)
Function performed by the assessee such as planning of
building, preparation of land map, preparation of ground
plan of factory, stability certificate, installed
capacity assessment, and property valuation comes within
the ambit of the term ‘Consulting Engineer’ –
Commissioner v. Rabindra Das 2003 (158) ELT 487 (Tri.
Kolkata)
Work contract cannot be vivisected and part of it
subjected to service tax – Daelim Industrial Co. Ltd. v.
Commissioner 2003 (155) ELT 457 (Tri. Delhi)
Design element of works contract not liable to service
tax – Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. Commissioner 2004 (174)
ELT 322 (Tri. Delhi)
Designing, drawing carried out and completed outside
India, not impossible with Service Tax. At the time of
entering into agreement and rendering of service, no
provision in existence regarding imposition of tax on
receiver of service, hence service not liable to tax –
In Re: Thyssen Krupp JBM Pvt. Ltd. 2005 (180) ELT 285 (Commr.
Appl.)
Leasing on sale of trademark is merely a transaction in
tangible property and not a consultancy or advice.
Service tax is not payable in respect of receipts under
agreement allowing use of trademark to other
manufacturers – Aviat Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 2004 (170) ELT
466 (Tri. Delhi)
Payments of royalty in the common parlance are not
insisted as payment for a service provided. It is
understood as a share of product or profit reserved by
owner for permitting another the use of his property –
Navinon Ltd. v. Commissioner 2004 (172) ELT 400 (Tri.
Mumbai)
Knowledge of service where it is based upon knowledge in
engineering comes within ‘service tax’ whether it is an
individual, or a firm or an incorporated company – M. N.
Dastur & Company Ltd. v. Union of India 2002 (140) ELT
341 (Cal.)
Valuation of immovable property is to be regarded as
advice in the nature of ‘engineering advice’ on the
basis of knowledge of engineering. Accordingly, valuers
rendering service as ‘consulting engineer’, service tax
leviable on services provided by such valuers – V.
Shanmughavel (Dr.) v. Commissioner 2001 (131) ELT 14
(Mad.) |