Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3.1 As regards the services rendered to the Employees Provident Fund Organisation and the Department of Company Affairs, both services relates to upgradation of information technology systems and operations of these organizations and services rendered by the appellant would be classifiable under the Information Technology Service which came under the tax net effective from 16.05.2008.

3.2 The learned Counsel also relies on the judgement of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of CUS. & C.EX., Hyderabad II vs. CMC Ltd.  2007 (7) S.T.R. 702 (Tri.  Bang.) wherein it was held that issue of Photo Identity Cards to electors will not come under the category of Business Auxiliary Service or Photography Service. He also relies on the judgement of this Tribunal in the case of C.C., C.E. & S.T., Hyderabad II vs. C.S. Software Enterprises Ltd.  2008 (10) S.T.R. 367 (Tri.  Bang.). He further relies on the judgement of this Tribunal in the case of Gandhi & Gandhi, Chartered Accountants vs. C.C.E. Hyderabad  2010 (17) S.T.R. 25 (Tri.  Bang.) wherein it was held that Computerized data processing for billing and accounts management service will not come under the category of Business Auxiliary Service for the period prior to 01.05.2006. He further relies on the judgement of this Tribunal in the case of Dataware Computers vs. Commr. of C.EX., CUS. & S.Tax (A) Guntur  2008 (12) S.T.R. 121 (Tri.  Bang.) wherein it was held that Generation of MIS reports and development of software for such purpose would be covered under Information Technology Service and not under Business Auxiliary Service.