COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA Vs. STHAPATYA RACHANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE has filed this appeal against the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order of the Original Adjudicating Authority confirming demand of service tax from the respondent for providing consulting engineer services with interest and imposition of penalty.

(2.) HEARD both sides. Ld. SDR on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the service provided on which tax has been demanded is valuation of property and even though the services provider is not a qualified engineer but an architect, the service provided by him would require knowledge of engineering to arrive at a correct value of the property. Since service requires engineering knowledge tax has been correctly demanded. On the other hand ld. Advocate submits that as per the trade notice issued by Delhi vide Trade Notice No. 1/98 -S.T., dated 5 -1 -1998, architects are not under the ambit of service provided by consulting engineers in view of the fact that consulting engineer service covers services provided by a professionally qualified engineer and engineering and architecture are considered as separate disciplines of technical education and two separate professions. Council of Architecture and All India Council for Technical Education have been relied upon to arrive at this conclusion. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that only when valuation of immovable property is done by a professionally qualified engineer which is not the case here, it is covered by consulting engineer service.

(3.) AFTER considering the submissions from both sides, we find that the decisions of the Commissioner (Appeals) is logical and in this case it is an individual who is providing the service. The proprietor is an architect and not a qualified engineer. Only services provided by a professionally qualified engineer is covered by the consulting engineer service. If service receivers find the consultation acceptable given by a non -qualified engineer, it would not mean that service tax is payable on such service. The basic requirement is that service should have been provided by a professionally qualified engineer. It is not the case here. We also note that the Trade Notice cited by the Dy. Commissioner covers the case. In view of the above, appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.