ARJITA TRIPATHI vs LUCKNOW- Appeal

Court
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD

REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I

Service Tax Appeal No.70288 of 2026


(Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No.253-ST/APPL/LKO/2025, dated 23.07.2025
passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Customs, CGST & Central Excise, Lucknow)

Arjita Tripathi …..Appellant
(C-726, Sector-C, Mahanagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226006)

VERSUS

Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Lucknow
….Respondent
(7-A Ashok Marg, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226001)

A PPEARANCE :
Shri Dushyant Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant
Ms. Chitra Srivastava, Authorised Representative for the Respondent


CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. P.K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

FINAL ORDER NO.70326/2026

DATE OF HEARING : 27.08.2026
DATE OF DECISION : 02.09.2026



P. K. CHOUDHARY:

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant assailing
the Order-In-Appeal No.253-ST/APPL/LKO/2025, dated
23.07.2025 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Customs, CGST &
Central Excise, Lucknow.
2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Appellant is
providing water supply and sewerage related services to Jalkal
Vibhag of Government of Uttar Pradesh. It is the submission of
the learned Advocate that the Appellant was under the bona fide

Service Tax Appeal No.70288 of 2026
2

belief that the services provided by her are covered under the
Mega Exemption Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012
under Serial No.25. It is also the submission of the learned
Advocate that the Appellant had neither collected the Service Tax
from the service recipients nor had obtained any Service Tax
1
registration. For the Financial Year 2015-16, a Show Cause Notice
dated 27.12.2020 was issued proposing to demand Service Tax as
under:-
Financial
* Year
Amount
credited in
Form 26AS
(In INR.)
Sale of
Services
Shown in ITR
(In INR.)
Higher Value
between
Column (2) &
(3) is being
the Taxable
Value (In
INR.)
Rate of
Service
Tax
(inclusive
of all
cess)
Service Tax
Payable (In
INR.)
Service
Tax
Paid
(In
INR.)
Short paid
Service tax
inclusive of
all cess on
the
differential
amount (In
INR.)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2015-16 1,09,42,587/-1,09,42,587/- 1,09,42,587/- 14.50% 15,86,675/- 0 15,86,675/-

3. Vide the Order-in-Original dated 23.04.2024 which was
passed Ex-Parte, since the learned Adjudicating Authority has
observed that the Appellant neither submitted any reply to the
SCN nor attended the personal hearing fixed on various dates. The
demand as proposed in the SCN was confirmed along with
applicable interest and penalty of Rs.10,000/- each was imposed
under Section 77(1)(a), 77(1)(c)(i), 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) &
77(1)(d) and penalty of equal amount under Section 78 of the
Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 142 & Section 174 of CGST
Act, 2017.
4. On appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the
learned Commissioner (Appeals) partly allowed the appeal before
him by considering that the services provided to Jalkal Vibhag
Nagar Nigam Kanpur & Jal Kal Vibhag Nagar Nigam, Lucknow are
covered under Serial No.25 of Mega Exemption Notification
No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 (Supra) as claimed by the
Appellant. However, relating to similar services provided to Nagar
Nigam, Gorakhpur, Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and Allahabad Jal

1
SCN

Service Tax Appeal No.70288 of 2026
3

Sansthan, it is observed that since the Appellant failed to produce
any document evidencing the nature of services provided, hence
nature of service cannot be ascertained. Accordingly, exemption
claimed by the Appellant cannot be extended and accordingly, he
upheld the proportionate demand of Service Tax of Rs.5,06,990/-
against the Appellant. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is in appeal
before the Tribunal.
5. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant
submits that the dispute in the present appeal pertains to the
Financial Year 2015-16 and almost a decade has passed and the
Appellant made efforts to collect the workorders in respect of the
Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur, Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and Allahabad
Jal Sansthan, but was not successful in procuring the same.
However, it is his submission that the entire proceedings were
initiated on the basis of third party data sharing received from the
Income Tax Department and there is no ambiguity that the
Appellant has provided the same services to all the service
recipients viz. to Jalkal Vibhag Nagar Nigam Kanpur, Jal Kal
Vibhag Nagar Nigam, Lucknow, Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur,
Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and Allahabad Jal Sansthan for
maintenance and operation of High Quality Treated Drinking
Water Plant (RO Plant) and as per the conditions of the work
orders, the Appellant has installed and commissioned high quality
drinking water plants at different locations as required by Jalkal
Vibhag Nagar Nigam Kanpur, Jal Kal Vibhag Nagar Nigam,
Lucknow, Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur, Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and
Allahabad Jal Sansthan for supply of drinking water. The Appellant
has been provided potable water and electricity free of cost for the
operation and maintenance of the drinking water plant to dispense
treated water to the general public. Thus, the operation of the
Appellant is in respect of providing the 'Public Utility Service' by
managing operation of Nalkoops on behalf of Jalkal Vibhag Nagar
Nigam Kanpur, Jal Kal Vibhag Nagar Nigam, Lucknow, Nagar
Nigam, Gorakhpur, Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and Allahabad Jal
Sansthan. The consideration for the above mentioned services are

Service Tax Appeal No.70288 of 2026
4

paid at a fixed rate as per the work orders/contracts. On the basis
of third party data received from the Income Tax Department for
the financial year 2015-16, it appeared to the Department that
the gross receipts of the Appellant are subject to payment of
Service Tax since the Appellant was not registered with the
Service Tax Department.
6. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant
submits that work orders of Nagar Nigam Lucknow and Nagar
Nigam Kanpur have been extended/renewed from time to time.
7. The learned Authorized Representative appearing on behalf
of the Revenue has justified the impugned order and prayed that
the appeal filed by the Appellant, being devoid of any merits, may
be dismissed.
8. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records.
9. I find that the Appellant has been providing services to
Jalkal Vibhag Nagar Nigam Kanpur, Jal Kal Vibhag Nagar Nigam,
Lucknow, Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur, Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and
Allahabad Jal Sansthan. It is the case of the Appellant that the
services are exempt vide Entry No. 25 of Mega Exemption
Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. I find that the
services rendered by the Appellant pertains to the operation of
Nalkoop at different locations. The rate of operation is prescribed
per Nalkoop per shift and per day which reveals that the Appellant
is receiving the consideration solely for operation of Nalkoop and
the services rendered by the Appellant pertains to supply of water.
Sr. No.25 of Notification No.25/2012-ST (Supra) is reproduced as
under:-
“25. Services provided to Government, a local authority or
a governmental authority by way of -
(a) carrying out any activity in relation to any function
ordinarily entrusted to a municipality in relation to water
supply, public health, sanitation conservancy, solid waste
management or slum improvement and upgradation; or
(b) repair or maintenance of a vessel or an aircraft;”

Service Tax Appeal No.70288 of 2026
5

10. Since, the services rendered to the Jal Kal Vibhag, Nagar
Nigam Lucknow and Jal Kal Vibhag, Nagar Nigam Kanpur, Nagar
Nigam, Gorakhpur, Varanasi Jal Sansthan, and Allahabad Jal
Sansthan pertains to supply of water, hence the same are eligible
for exemption from Service Tax under the aforesaid Sr. No.25 of
the said Notification. Accordingly, the considerations received are
exempt from payment of Service Tax.
11. In view of the above discussions, the appeal filed by the
Appellant is allowed with consequential benefit, if any, as per law.

(Pronounced in open court on 02.09.2026)


Sd/-
(P. K. CHOUDHARY)
MEMBER (JUDICIAL)


Nihal