9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present case, there is no reference to third party in the agreement or the transaction between the appellant and CSIDC. To call such sale of water, on a project developed, owned and maintained by the appellant as infrastructure support service is not tenable - the activities falling under the scope of the agreement 1998, for consideration on sale of water, cannot be taxed under the category of “support of services of business or Commerce” - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/55148/2013-DB - Final Order No. ST/A/50491/2017-CU(DB) - Dated:- 23-1-2017 - Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (J) and B. Ravichandran, Member (T) Shri B.L. Narsimhan and Karan Sachdeva, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri Sanjay Jain, DR, for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er on agreed tariff rates to CSIDC. The agreement is between two parties on principal to principal basis with no involvement or knowledge to third party. (b) The statutory definition of Support of Business or Commerce talks about mainly outsourced services of such nature like evaluation of prospective customers, telemarketing, processing of purchase orders and fulfilment of services which also includes processing, support service and other transaction processing. The reading of the definition will clearly show that one party outsources their work with reference to their business. The nature of such activities were covered in the scope of tax entry. Supply of water on sale basis is not covered by the tax entry, more specifically In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave heard both the sides and perused the appeal records and written submissions. 5. The impugned order upheld the liability of the appellant to service tax for the amount received by the appellant towards water supply to CSIDC. We have carefully perused the agreement as well as findings in the impugned order. First of all, we note that the agreement entered into in 1998 between the appellant and the erstwhile MPSIDC is for development, operating, maintaining water supply, sharing risks, etc. The agreement clearly deals with the responsibility of the appellant as well as MPSIDC (later CSIDC). The appellant were given the right of operation and maintenance for basic 20 years after the construction of the project. The tariff structure as pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rastructural support services includes providing office along with office utilities, lounge, reception with competent personnel to handle messages, secretarial services, internet and telecom facilities, pantry and security. 6. Plain reading of the statutory definition will indicate that the scope of tax entry is basically for outsourcing service of such nature and do not dealt with any sale or purchase of items without reference to third party. As already noted, there is no reference to third party in the agreement or the transaction between the appellant and CSIDC. To call such sale of water, on a project developed, owned and maintained by the appellant as infrastructure support service is not tenable. The water supplied was paid for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
