Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Supreme Court Holds Import of "Engineering Design & Drawings" for Manufacturing WTGs Taxable Under "Design Services"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has held that the import of "Engineering Design & Drawings" for the purpose of manufacturing Wind Turbine Generators (WTGs) is subject to service tax under the category of "design services." The judgment, delivered by Justice M.R. Shah, clarified the taxability of such imports under the Finance Act, 1994.

The case before the apex court, titled Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax vs. M/S Suzlon Energy Ltd., pertained to an appeal filed by the Revenue against the decision of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had ruled in favor of Suzlon Energy Ltd., holding that the "Engineering Design & Drawings" imported for the manufacturing of WTGs were not liable to service tax under the category of "design services."

The court examined the definition of "design services" under Section 65(35b) of the Finance Act, 1994, and found it to be comprehensive, encompassing various types of design services such as furniture, consumer products, industrial products, logos, graphics, websites, and corporate identity designing. The only exclusions under this definition were fashion design and interior designing.

Suzlon Energy Ltd., a manufacturer of WTGs, had entered into an agreement with its sister companies for the exclusive use of designs and drawings in India. The company classified these designs as "goods" for customs purposes and claimed exemption from service tax. However, the court held that the designs fell within the ambit of "design services" as defined under the Finance Act, 1994.

The court rejected the argument that treating the designs as goods for customs purposes would exempt them from service tax. It emphasized that the same activity can be taxed as both goods and services if the contract is indivisible and involves the transfer of both. Referring to the earlier decision in BSNL v. Union of India, the court held that the intention of the contracting parties to transfer both goods and services is crucial in determining the taxability.

While setting aside the CESTAT's judgment, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the CESTAT to consider additional grounds raised by Suzlon Energy Ltd., including whether services rendered by foreign entities fall under "design services" and the invocation of the extended period of limitation.

 

Date: April 10, 2023

Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax vs. M/S Suzlon Energy Ltd.

Latest Legal News