Budget Books

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Consulting Engineer

Court :

Brief :

Citation :

‘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.)

on 18 September 2008
Published in Service Tax
Views :
Report Abuse


IIM Indor
caclubindia books