Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2013-14/1949

Maintenance and repair services of railway sidings exempted from service tax since 2010.

Case:-  CENTRAL RAILWAY VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & CUS., NAGPUR

Citation:- 2013 (31) S.T.R. 134 (Bom.)

Brief facts:- The Central Railway has carried out maintenance and, repairs of rail­way sidings owned by private parties. According to the Revenue, this Constitutes a taxable service of the management and maintenance of repairs and services as defined in Section 65(105)(zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended, with effect from 16 June 2005. The demands in question were governed by two show cause notices. The first show cause notice was for 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08, dated 13 October 2010. The second show cause notice was for 2010-11 and was dated 3 May 2011. Both the show cause notices were adjudicated upon. The dues on ac­count of service tax are Rs. 2.51 crores under the first show cause notice and Rs. 74.22 lakhs under the second show cause notice. The demand has been con­firmed on adjudication. On an application for stay, the CESTAT has directed the Appellant to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the service tax and to report compli­ance.
 
Appellant’s contention:- The Appellant submitted that by a Noti­fication dated 21 December 2010, an exemption was provided in respect of man­agement, maintenance or repair of railways. Hence, it has been urged that a waiver was necessary. Moreover, it has been urged that the dues of the Union Government are secure since, after all, it is the Union Ministry of Railways which has to pay the demand if it is found to be due and payable.
 
Respondent’s contention:-  The respondent sup­ported the order of the Tribunal.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:-After considering both the sides and persuing the record,, it is concluded that on 27 July 2009, the Central Government in the Ministry of Finance issued a Notification under Section 93(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 exempting the taxable service referred to in Section 65(105)(zzg) provided to any person by any other person in relation to management, maintenance or repair of roads, from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon. The earlier Notification was amended on 21 January 2010 to expand the scope of the exemption to cover, inter alia, the management, maintenance or repair of roads, bridges, tunnels, dams, airports, railways and transport terminals. In view of the exemption, prima facie, it appears that from 21 December 2010 the service provided for the management, mainte­nance or repair of railways stands exempted. The contention of the Appellant is that the work of management and repair of railway sidings owned by private parties is an incident of the maintenance and repair of the railway tracks. This, in our view, would raise prima facie a substantial question for consideration. Hence, insofar as the demand covered by the second show cause notice dated 3 May 2011 for 2010-11 is concerned (Rs. 74.22 laths), a complete waiver of deposit was warranted. That leaves the balance of the demand of Rs. 2.51 crores which relates to the period 2005-06 to 2007-08. This period is prior to the exemption notifica­tion. Having regard to the fact that the demand has been levied against the Un­ion Ministry of Railways, we are of the view that the ends of justice would re­quire that the extent of the deposit should be scaled down. At the same time, having evaluated the merits, prima facie, we are of the view that an absolute waiver for the earlier period is not warranted. No case of financial hardship has been urged at the hearing. On the circumstances, we direct in this appeal that (i) there shall be a complete waiver of pre-deposit in respect of the demand for Rs. 74.22 lakhs gov­erned by the show cause notice dated 3 May 2011 for the period 2010-11 as adju­dicated; and (ii) as regards the balance of the demand for Rs. 2.51 crores for the period 2005-06 to 2007-08 governed by the show cause notice dated 13 October 2010 as adjudicated, the Appellant shall deposit an amount equivalent to 20% of the demand within a period of eight weeks from today. The order of the Tribunal shall stand modified accordingly in these terms. The question of law accordingly stands answered. We clarify that our ob­servations in this order are only confined to a prima facie evaluation for the pur­pose of the stay application and shall not come in the way of the final disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal on merits. The Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
 
Decision:- Stay partly granted.

Comment:- The essence of the case is that maintenance and repair of roads, railways etc is exempted from the levy of service tax since year 2010 and so complete stay from pre-deposit granted for the demand for the period after 2010. However, as there was no exemption prior to the year 2010 and considering the fact that the appellant is a part of government department, 20% of the demand ordered as pre-deposit.  
 
 
 

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