9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,08,587/- under the 'Real Estate Agent's Service' during the period 01 April 2006 to 31 March 2011 with interest under Section 75 and penalties under Sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 has been upheld. 2. The appellant is a real estate developer engaged in the business of development of land by constructing residential & commercial real estate projects for the purpose of selling it to the intending customers. It is registered with the Service Tax Department under the category of "Construction Services", "Works contract services" and "Construction of Complex Services". It received certain administration charges / transfer charges from customers intending to change their name in the ownership records upon transfer of property in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vs. CST, New Delhi reported in 2017 (110) TMI-546-CESTAT, New Delhi as also the decision of this Tribunal in MGF Developments Ld. Vs. CCE, Delhi reported in 2018 (2) TMI-1048-CESTAT, New Delhi. 5. Learned Representative of the Department has, however, supported the impugned order and has referred to the relevant paragraphs of the said order. 6. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsels for the parties. 7. Section 65(88) of the Finance Act, 1994 defines 'Real Estate Agent Service', while Section 65(89) defines 'Real Estate Consultant. Section 65(105)(v) defines the taxable service in relation to Real Estate Agent. These three Sections are reproduced below: "65 (88) "real estate agent" means a person who is eng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thing in the show cause notice or the relied upon documents to show that the respondent acted in a capacity of "real estate agent" between the earlier owner and the new buyer of the flat. The changes made in the records of the respondent are not causative factors for such sale or purchase. We are in agreement with the observation of the Original Authority. In RIICO -2017-TIOL-1725-CESTAT-DEL., the Tribunal held that the transfer charges received by the appellant for permitting the transfer of allotted land from one person to another cannot be taxed as real estate agent service because they were custodians of land and were dealing with the allottee on principal to principal basis, not as an agent of either party. We note that the reliance pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
