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

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2014-15/2366

Whether Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on input services used in the construction of immovable property which is further rented out be availed?

Case:OBEROI MALL LTD Vs COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, MUMBAI

 
Citation:2014-TIOL-1757-CESTAT-MUM
 
Brief Fact:
 
The appeal and stay petition are directed against order-in-original No. 04-06/ST-II/RS/2014 dated 30/01/2014 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai. Vide the impugned order, the learned adjudicating authority has disallowed Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs.2,02,62,906/- availed by the appellant in respect of various input services relating to construction of mall which was subsequently rented out to various customers. Apart from the service tax demand, interest liability has also been confirmed and equivalent amount of penalty under Section 78 and a penalty of Rs.5,000/- under Section 77 were also imposed. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before us.
 
Appellant contention:
 
The learned Consultant for the appellant submits that this is second round of litigation. In the first round of litigation, when the matter had come up before this Tribunal, this Tribunal had granted stay vide order No.S/163-165/13/CSTB/C-I dated 14/01/2013=2013-TIOL-604-CESTATMUM and thereafter vide Order No. ST/CO/91025 to 91027/13 dated 22/05/2013 = 2013-TIOL- 1241-CESTAT-MUM the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority to give clear finding as to why the appellant is not eligible for the benefit of service tax paid on inputs services in respect of construction services, in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd.{2013 (30) ST 3} = 2013-TIOL-12-HC-AHM-STand the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Navaratna S.G. Highway Prop (P) Ltd. {2012 (28) STR 166 (Tri-Ahmd-2012-TIOL-1245-CESTAT-AHM. In the second round of litigation, the adjudicating authority has once again confirmed the demand by denying the credit by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Galaxy Mercantile Ltd. = 2013-TIOL-751-HCALL- ST. The learned Consultant submits that in the Galaxy Mercantile Ltd. case, the question for consideration before the Hon'ble High Court was, whether Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods could be availed in respect of a building constructed which was subsequently used for warehousing purpose. In that case, the Tribunal vide order dated 24/07/2013 2013-TIOL-1442-CESTAT-DEL, by majority decision, held that Cenvat Credit availed on inputs service is not required to be reversed and only directed pre-deposit of 35% of the Cenvat Credit attributable to inputs and capital goods. The said decision was challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad and the same was upheld. Therefore, the question of availing Cenvat Credit on inputs service on the construction of immovable property was not considered by the Hon'ble High Court at all. Therefore, reliance on the same decision for confirmation of service tax demand is clearly not sustainable.
The learned Consultant further submits that as per the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Sai Sahmita Storages (P) Ltd. = 2011-TIOL-863-HC-AP-CXthe credit of service tax paid on input service is available when the same is used for construction of immovable property, which is thereafter used for warehousing. He also referred to the decision in the case of Navratna S.G. Highway Prop. (P) Ltd., wherein a similar view was taken. Accordingly he pleads for grant of stay.
 
 
Respondent Contention:
The learned Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority and it is his contention that the impugned demands are sustainable in law and the appellant be put to terms.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:
As regards the reliance placed by the adjudicating authority in the case of Galaxy Mercantile Ltd., the said decision did not pertain to eligibility of Cenvat Credit on input services which were used in the construction of an immovable property. The question for consideration before the Hon'ble High Court was only limited to eligibility of Cenvat Credit on inputs and capital goods. In fact, in the said case, this Tribunal had held that the appellant was eligible for availing Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on input services and therefore, reliance placed by the adjudicating authority on this decision does not support the Revenue's case at all.
 
We further observe that the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of                            Sai Sahmita Storages (P) Ltd. and this tribunal in the case of Navratna S.G. Highway Pro. (P) Ltd. has held that Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on input services used in the construction of immovable property would be available if such immovable property is used for rendering other taxable services. Following the same in the present case also, we hold that the appellant has made out a prima facie case for grant of stay. Accordingly, we grant unconditional waiver from pre-deposit of dues adjudged against the appellant and stay recovery thereof during the pendency of the appeal.
 
 
Decision : Stay granted

Comment:
The tribunal while delivering its decision stated that there is no such bar on the availment of input services used in the construction of immovable property to the extent such constructed property is further used in the rendering of other output services.
 
Prepared By: Meet Jain

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