Disposed

Prin. Commissioner Cgst and Central Excise , Lucknow v. M/S Meatek Food and Machineries India Pvt. Ltd. , Lucknow

Allahabad HC14 Aug 2024CEXA/2/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) heard an interim application by the Principal Commissioner Cgst challenging an STAT order granting service tax exemption. The court observed that while the nomination service figures were provided to a government authority, there may be factors affecting the non-profit nature of the service. The matter was listed for further hearing, and the impugned order

What did the court decide?

Impugned Final Order of the STAT shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.

Prin. Commissioner Cgst and Central Excise , Lucknow… — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 3

¶2

Case :- CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL No. - 2 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Prin. Commissioner Cgst And Central Excise , Lucknow Respondent :- M/S Meatek Food And Machineries India Pvt. Ltd. , Lucknow

¶4

Counsel for Appellant :- Dheeraj Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Order on C.M.Application No. 01 of 2024.

¶7

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant on the application for Interim Relief.

¶8

It is the case of the appellant that by means of the order impugned, exemption has been granted by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad(Seized Tax), Regional Bench, by misreading the exemption notification. M/s Meatek Food & Machineries India Pvt. Ltd., the respondents were registered for the service tax purposes under the category of "Consulting Engineer Services". They are involved in erection, commissioning & installation service and transport of goods. The respondents had been engaged for the establishment of Modern Slaughter House for Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The bill raised for the project was of Rs. 8,95,50,000/- This amount was charged for providing different type of services like Design and Engineering, Land & Site Development & Civil works etc. and against the said amount, the respondents have paid service tax of Rs. 21,10,470/- only. For the remaining amount of service tax, the respondents claimed exemption, as according to them, they have provided their services to a Government Authority/Kolkata Municipal Corporation and therefore, it did not attract the service tax liability as per the provisions of Serial No. 12(a) of the Service Tax Mega Exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20-06-2012.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out from the Serial No. 12(a) of the Service Tax Mega Exemption Notification, which has been referred to in the order impugned and the language thereof, is quite clear. It has been mentioned under Serial No.

¶10

12 of the Exemption Notification that the services provided to the Government, a local authority or a govenmental authority by way of construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation or alteration of-

¶11

(a) a civil structure of any other original works meant predominantly for use other than for commerce, industry, or any other business or profession;

¶12

It has been submitted that the Kolkata Municipal Corporation charges fees for slaughtering of animals and it is not purely a non profitable service rendered to the public.

¶13

The matter requires consideration.

¶14

List this matter on 14-08-2024.

¶15

Till the next date of listing, the impugned Final Order No. FO/ST/A/70019/2024-ST(DB) dated 0501-2024, passed by Customs, Exercise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, shall remain stayed.

¶16

Order Date :- 24.7.2024 AKS

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Prin. Commissioner Cgst and Central Excise , Lucknow v. M/S Meatek Food and Machineries India Pvt. Ltd. , Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prin. Commissioner Cgst and Central Excise , Lucknow v. M/S Meatek Food and Machineries India Pvt. Ltd. , Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Nihal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko and 4 Others

The Society Bhartiya Inclusive Development Foundation Thru. Chairman Piyush Kumar Srivastav vs Govt. of India Thru. Ministry of the Information/Broadcasting New Delhi and 2 Others

Ram Bahadur Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. D.M. Amethi and 3 Others

Chandan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Energy Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and 4 Others

The Society Bhartiya Inclusive Development Foundation Thru. Chairman Piyush Kumar Srivastav vs Govt. of India Thru. Ministry of the Information/Broadcasting New Delhi and 2 Others

Anil Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others