Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Publish Date: 31 Jul, 2009
Print   |    |  Comment

Repairing the Controversy of Service Tax on Repair of Roads

 

 

REPAIRING THE CONTROVERSY OF SERVICE TAX ON REPAIR OF ROADS

 

 

The matter of levy of service tax on maintenance of roads has passed through many controversies. No service tax is leviable on construction of roads. But what about the service tax liability on maintenance and repair of roads? Will it be chargeable to tax? This was subject to great controversy. The matter has been finally settled by the Finance Minister granting exemption to repair and maintenance of services.

 

SERVICE TAX ON SERVICES RELATING TO ROADS:

 

The construction of roads does not fall under service tax net. It is specifically excluded from the purview of ‘commercial or industrial construction service’ as well as from ‘works contract service’. The said definition of ‘commercial or industrial construction service’ under Section 65 (25b) of the Finance Act, 1994 has been reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-  

 

( 25b) "commercial or industrial construction service" means—

( a) construction of a new building or a civil structure or a part thereof; or

( b) construction of pipeline or conduit; or

( c) completion and finishing services such as glazing, plastering, painting, floor and wall tiling, wall covering and wall papering, wood and metal joinery and carpentry, fencing and railing, construction of swimming pools, acoustic applications or fittings and other similar services, in relation to building or civil structure; or

( d) repair, alteration, renovation or restoration of, or similar services in relation to, building or civil structure, pipeline or conduit, which is—

( i) used, or to be used, primarily for; or

( ii) occupied, or to be occupied, primarily with; or

( iii) engaged, or to be engaged, primarily in,

commerce or industry, or work intended for commerce or industry, but does not include such

services provided in respect of roads, airports, railways, transport terminals, bridges, tunnels

and dams;']

 

The definition of ‘Works Contract’ under Section 65 (zzzza) of the Finance Act, 1994 has been reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-  

 

(zzzza)  to any person, by any other person in relation to the execution of a works contract, excluding works contract in respect of roads, airports, railways,   transport terminals, bridges, tunnels and dams.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-clause, “works contract” means a contract wherein,—

(i) transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of such contract is leviable to tax as sale of goods, and

(ii) such contract is for the purposes of carrying out,—

(a)    erection, commissioning or installation of plant, machinery, equipment or  structures, whether pre-fabricated or otherwise, installation of electrical and electronic devices, plumbing, drain laying or other installations for transport of fluids, heating, ventilation or air-conditioning including related pipe work, duct work and sheet metal work, thermal insulation, sound insulation, fire proofing or water proofing, lift and escalator, fire escape staircases or elevators; or

(b) construction of a new building or a civil structure or a part thereof, or of a pipeline or conduit, primarily for the purposes of commerce or industry; or

(c) construction of a new residential complex or a part thereof; or

(d) completion and finishing services, repair, alteration, renovation or restoration of, or similar services, in relation to (b) and (c); or

(e) turnkey projects including engineering, procurement and construction or commissioning (EPC) projects;

 

CIRCULARS OF BOARD

 

However, maintenance and repair of roads was held to be taxable under the “management, maintenance and repair service” by the revenue authorities. As per the clarification given by the Board letter bearing F.No.B1/6/2005-TRU, dated 27.07.05, the tax on maintenance and repair of roads was leviable from 16.06.05. The relevant portion of the said Letter is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-

 

16.2 Prior to 16/6/2005, such services covered maintenance or repair or servicing of any goods or equipment, excluding motor vehicles. However, since 16/6/2005, services relating to maintenance or management of immovable property (such as roads, airports, railways, buildings, parks, electrical installations and the like) have also been covered under the purview of service tax. Such services would be taxable when provided under a contract or an agreement by any person or by a manufacturer or any person authorized by a manufacturer.

 

16.4 Prior to 16/6/2005, maintenance or repair carried out under a maintenance contract or agreement was covered under service tax. Repair or servicing carried out under a contract other than a maintenance contract or agreement was not covered within the purview of service tax. Maintenance or repair, including reconditioning or restoration or servicing of any goods or equipment, except motor vehicle (which is taxable under the category of authorized service station), undertaken as part of any contract or agreement (not necessarily maintenance contract or agreement) is now liable to service tax under this category of taxable service. To attract service tax under this category, the contract or agreement need not necessarily be a maintenance contract / agreement.

 

The Board issued Circular No. 110/4/2009-ST dated 23.02.09 clarifying that maintenance and repair of roads is taxable under ‘Management, Maintenance or Repair Service’. It was also clarified as to what will constitute construction of road and will not fall under service tax net as well as what will constitute as maintenance and repair of roads and will be exigible to service tax. The said Circular is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-

 

Circular No. 110/4/2009-ST Dated 23/2/2009

Reference from Commissioner Nashik seeking clarification in respect of levy of service tax on Repair/ renovation/ widening of roads – Regarding.-Representations have been received by the Board pointing out divergent practices being followed by field formations with regard to levy of service tax on maintenance and repair of roads.

2. Commercial or industrial construction service [section 65(105) (zzq)] specifically excludes construction or repairs of roads. However, management, maintenance or repair provided under a contract or an agreement in relation to properties, whether immovable or not, is leviable to service tax under section 65(105) (zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994. There is no specific exemption under this service for maintenance or repair of roads etc. Reading the definitions of these two taxable services in tandem leads to the conclusion that while construction of road is not a taxable service, management, maintenance or repair of roads are in the nature of taxable services, attracting service tax.

 

3. The next issue requiring resolution is the types of activities that can be called as ‘construction of road’ as against the activities which should fall under the category of maintenance or repair of roads. In this regard the technical literature on the subject indicate that the activities can be categorized as follows,-

 

(A) Maintenance or repair activities:

 

I. Resurfacing

 

II. Renovation

 

III. Strengthening

 

IV. Relaying

 

V. Filling of potholes

 

(B) Construction Activities:

 

I. Laying of a new road

 

II. Widening of narrow road to broader road (such as conversion of a two lane road to a four lane road)

 

III. Changing road surface (graveled road to metalled road/ metalled road to blacktopped/ blacktopped to concrete etc)

 

4. The cases may be decided/ revenue should be protected based on the above classification. Suitable Trade and Public notices may be issued for information of the trade and field formations.

 

5. Receipt of this Circular may please be acknowledged.

 

6. Hindi Version will follow.

 

 

F. No. 345/ 17 /2008-TRU

 

Yours faithfully,

(Unmesh Sharad Wagh)

Under Secretary (TRU)

 

The Board issued Circular No. 110/4/2009-ST dated 23.02.09 clarifying that maintenance and repair of roads is taxable under ‘Management, Maintenance or Repair Service’. It was also clarified as to what will constitute construction of road and will not fall under service tax net as well as what will constitute as maintenance and repair of roads and will be exigible to service tax. The said Circular is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-

 

Circular No. 110/4/2009-ST Dated 23/2/2009

Reference from Commissioner Nashik seeking clarification in respect of levy of service tax on Repair/ renovation/ widening of roads – Regarding.-Representations have been received by the Board pointing out divergent practices being followed by field formations with regard to levy of service tax on maintenance and repair of roads.

2. Commercial or industrial construction service [section 65(105) (zzq)] specifically excludes construction or repairs of roads. However, management, maintenance or repair provided under a contract or an agreement in relation to properties, whether immovable or not, is leviable to service tax under section 65(105) (zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994. There is no specific exemption under this service for maintenance or repair of roads etc. Reading the definitions of these two taxable services in tandem leads to the conclusion that while construction of road is not a taxable service, management, maintenance or repair of roads are in the nature of taxable services, attracting service tax.

 

3. The next issue requiring resolution is the types of activities that can be called as ‘construction of road’ as against the activities which should fall under the category of maintenance or repair of roads. In this regard the technical literature on the subject indicate that the activities can be categorized as follows,-

 

(A) Maintenance or repair activities:

 

I. Resurfacing

 

II. Renovation

 

III. Strengthening

 

IV. Relaying

 

V. Filling of potholes

 

(B) Construction Activities:

 

I. Laying of a new road

 

II. Widening of narrow road to broader road (such as conversion of a two lane road to a four lane road)

 

III. Changing road surface (graveled road to metalled road/ metalled road to blacktopped/ blacktopped to concrete etc)

 

4. The cases may be decided/ revenue should be protected based on the above classification. Suitable Trade and Public notices may be issued for information of the trade and field formations.

 

5. Receipt of this Circular may please be acknowledged.

 

6. Hindi Version will follow.

 

 

F. No. 345/ 17 /2008-TRU

 

Yours faithfully,

(Unmesh Sharad Wagh)

Under Secretary (TRU)

*******

 

JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS

 

However, the Commissioner (Appeals), Vishakhaptnam in Appeal No. 5/2008 (V-I) S.Tax dated 16.03.09 delivered order-in-appeal no. 27/2009 (V-I) ST held that no service tax is leviable at repair of road. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that since repair service provided in respect to roads has been specifically excluded from Section 65 (25b) of the Finance Act, 1994, the same cannot be subjected to any tax. It was further held that by reading the definitions of Commercial or Industrial construction service given in Section 65 (25b) it is implied that management or maintenance of all immovable properties including roads, airports, transport terminals, railways, bridges, tunnels and dams are liable to tax but not repairs.  

 

The Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the Board’s letter F.No.B1/6/2005-TRU, dated 27.07.05 and held that with regard to immovable property, the words maintenance or management have found place in the letter but the word ‘repair’ is conspicuously absent. Therefore, the activity of repairs carries out on roads was not exigible to service tax.

 

EXPERT’S OPINION

 

Experts in the field are of the view that there should not be any service tax on the repair or maintenance of road. It is a well settled principle that specific law prevails over the general law. Therefore, the exclusion clause under ‘Commercial or Industrial Construction services’ and under ‘Works Contract’ are specific provision which will prevail over the general provision under ‘Management, Maintenance and Repair Service’. Furthermore, the commercial construction and work construction includes not only construction of new civil structures but also repair, renovation or restoration of such civil structures. When it is included then why it is not included for roads. If the road is exempted under these categories then the repair and renovation will fall under this category only and no service tax is imposable on the same.

 

Another expert has stated that it is highly irrational to presume that there is no service tax on original construction of road but when the said road is being relayed or repaired then there is service tax leviable on the same.

 

Moreover, as the Government and Local Bodies are incharge of construction, repairing and maintaining of roads then payment of service tax by them would not benefit the Revenue in any way.

 

Thus, the controversy continued.

 

FINANCE MINISTER’S ANNOUNCEMENT:

 

The controversy came to an end when the Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee stepped up and announced in his speech on Budget on 27.07.09, exempting maintenance and repair of roads falling under the category of ‘Management, Maintenance or Repair Service’ from service tax. This exemption has been granted with immediate effect vide Notification No. 24/2004-ST dated 27.07.09.

 

The problems and controversies related to road repair were solved but the issue has not resolved completely yet.

 

REMAINING ISSUE:

 

Although by exempting repair and maintenance of roads under the category of ‘Management, Maintenance or Repair Service’ has solved the controversies. One issue still remains and will continue to create problems. The issue is regarding the applicability of exemption. The Finance Minister has granted the exemption with prospective effect from 27.07.09. This means that for the period prior to 27.07.09, service tax was leviable on road repair under ‘Management, Maintenance or Repair Service’. The Government should have granted the exemption retrospectively so that the relief would have been complete for State Governments, Local Bodies and Contractors which are involved in the construction, maintenance and repair of roads.

 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com