9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1042X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nance Security [IFMS] and Annual Maintenance Charges [AMC] - HELD THAT:- The amount is refundable in case of termination of the ownership agreement and if no such termination has taken place till date, the amount would not be refunded. As long as the provisions for refund of the said amount in the agreement itself is there, it has to be considered that the said amount is refundable and was towards security deposits and was not for the purpose of providing any services, so as to levy tax on the same. Demand of service tax of advance maintenance charges - HELD THAT:- Once it is an admitted fact that Paramount Facilities Services Pvt. Ltd. has provided services, no tax would be demanded from the Appellant. This is also a fact on record that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AL) AND MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Sandeep Pandey, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant assailing the Order-in-Appeal No.GZB-EXCUS-000-APP-0541-17-18 dated 20.06.2017 passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) Customs, Central Excise Service Tax, Appeal-II, Noida. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Appellant is collecting charges from their Customers under the category of Interest Free Maintenance Security [IFMS] and Annual Maintenance Charges [AMC] . Revenue by entertaining a view that such charges collected by the Appellant from the Flat Owners would form value of the services provided by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ownership agreement and if no such termination has taken place till date, the amount would not be refunded. As long as the provisions for refund of the said amount in the agreement itself is there, it has to be considered that the said amount is refundable and was towards security deposits and was not for the purpose of providing any services, so as to levy tax on the same. 5. In any case, we also note that the issue stands decided by precedent decisions of the Tribunal. Reference can be made to the Tribunal s decision in the case of CCE ST, Jaipur v. Sand Dunes Construction Pvt. Ltd. - 2018 (7) TMI-1383-CESTAT-New Delhi , whereby while taking note of the precedent decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kumar Beheray Rathi v. CCE, Pune - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department had already demanded service tax from Paramount Facilities Services Pvt. Ltd. under SCN dated 10.10.2014 for the same work during the same period and on same basis. It is also submitted that for the period 2010-11 to 2011-12 the Department had already issued another SCN demanding tax on parking charges which has been finally settled in favour of the Appellant on merits as well as on limitation. There was otherwise no reason to issue two SCNs on the same date and that too by invoking extended period of limitation. 7. However, we find that demand stands raised and confirmed by invoking longer period of limitation inasmuch as a SCN was issued on 15.10.2014 for the period July, 2010 to June, 2012. Apart from the fact that the Low ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
