9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 757 - AT - Service TaxConstruction services - liability of service tax - construction of houses for slum people - Held that - The activity of constructing houses for slum people under the government schemes is not taxable under Construction of Complex Services/ Works Contract/ CICS as it is intended for personal use - demand set aside. Services to SEZ - Held that - This issue is also covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Reliance Port and Terminals Ltd. Vs CCE & ST 2013 (10) TMI 339 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD , where it was held that the immunity to service tax in respect of taxable services provided in relation to SEZ is a legislatively enjoined immunity - demand set aside. Construction of stadium - Held that - Identical issue has been decided by the Tribunal in favor of the assessee in the case of B. G. Shirke Construction Technology Put Ltd. Vs CCE 2013 (11) TMI 870 - CESTAT MUMBAI the Sports Stadium constructed for conducting Commonwealth Games, is a non-commercial construction and not liable to service tax - demand set aside. Construction of Vishwavidyalay for M. P. Laghu Udyog - Held that - The construction of Vishwavidyalay for M. P. Laghu Udyog is also for public welfare and not for commercial purpose, hence not taxable in terms of Circular No.80/2004 dt 17.09.2004 - demand set aside. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
1. Taxability of construction services provided under government schemes 2. Taxability of services provided to SEZ units 3. Taxability of construction services for public welfare projects 4. Applicability of relevant case laws and circulars Taxability of construction services provided under government schemes: The appellants were engaged in constructing houses for slum people under government schemes like JNNURM and VAMBAY. A demand for service tax was raised, which was later reduced by the Commissioner. The appellant contended that construction under these schemes is not taxable as it is intended for personal use and falls under the exclusion clause of the definition of a residential complex. The Tribunal found that the activity is not taxable under Construction of Complex Services as it is meant for personal use, citing relevant case law. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. Taxability of services provided to SEZ units: The appellant provided services to SEZ units and argued that no service tax is payable under the SEZ Act and Rules. The Tribunal agreed, stating that the issue is covered by previous decisions and cited relevant case law. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. Taxability of construction services for public welfare projects: Regarding the construction of a stadium for a cricket association and a Vishwavidyalay for M.P. Laghu Udyog, the appellant argued that these projects are for public welfare and not for commercial purposes. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, citing relevant case law and Circular No. 80/2004. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant for these projects as well. Applicability of relevant case laws and circulars: The appellant relied on various case laws to support their contentions regarding the taxability of different construction services. The Tribunal considered these references and found them applicable in the present case, ultimately leading to the decision to set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal in favor of the appellant with consequential relief.
|
