The respondent assessee undertook a works contract for the supply, erection, installation, and commissioning of the project. The supply included manufactured as well as bought-out items. The revenue bifurcated the contract and demanded service tax on technical assistance rendered during the said project under “consulting engineer” service. A demand of about Rs. 2 crores was confirmed along with interest and penalty. The assessee filed an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT. The Hon’ble CESTAT analyzed the contract and allowed the appeal, holding that no consulting engineer service had been provided and no value could be attributed to the rendering of such service. The Revenue, being aggrieved, filed an appeal before the Hon’ble High Court.
The Hon’ble Meghalaya High Court dismissed the department’s appeal. It held that the appeal relating to value of service does not lie to the Hon’ble High Court under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act. Such an appeal would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court under section 35L of the Central Excise Act.
The Commissioner of Central Goods & Services Tax and Central Excise, Shillong Commissionerate vs. M/s Walchandnagar Industries Limited (C.Ex Appeal No. 2/2024) (Meghalaya HC)
