Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2019-2020/3597

?Whether sale of books is service? ?Whether provisions of hostel facility and sale of books are to be combined with provisions of commercial training orcoaching service as bundled service?
M/s Major Kalshi Classes Pvt. Ltd. Final Order No. 70147-70148/2020 dated 05.02.2020
Issue:
  • Whether sale of books is service?
  • Whether provisions of hostel facility and sale of books are to be combined with provisions of commercial training orcoaching service as bundled service?
  • Whether service tax was exempted on hostel facility?
 
Brief Facts:The appellants were engaged in providing ‘Commercial Training or coaching Service’. In addition to providing coaching, they were also selling text books published by M/s MKC publication. For the facility of some of the service recipients, the appellants were also providing hostel facility.
 
Appellant’s Contention:The appellant provides the below contentions
1.The appellant has submitted that the books and forms sold were sale of goods and that the books were published by M/sMKC Publication and they were also available to anybody forpurchase and it was not compulsory that they would be available to only those service recipients who were receiving commercial training or coaching service. He has submitted that the said books were available to be sold to anybody on Flipkart. He has further submitted that they issued independentinvoices towards sale of books and the sale of books and forms was maintained separately in the books of account. Hence no service tax was payable on sale of books.

2.The appellant submitted that hostel facility was independent activity and that it was not mandatory for every service recipientof commercial training or coaching service to avail hostel facility. Also they had submitted a list of students who did not avail hostel facility but availed the facility of training or coaching service. Further, they submitted a list of students who availed only hostel facility but did not received coaching service and therefore, it is clear thatcommercial training and coaching and availability of hostel areindependent of each other and the receipt of the same aremaintained separately in the books of account. They chargedRs.15,000/- for a period of six month to the students who preferto stay in the hostel. Further NotificationNo.31/2011 dated 25 April, 2011 exempted short term accommodation where tariff rate of room was less thanRs.1,000/- per day and that the appellant had charged less thanRs.100/- per day and therefore, service tax was not payable. He further submitted that for the period after 01 July, 2012 as perSerial No. 18 of Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20 June,2012, if a place is rented out for residential purpose and thetariff is below Rs.1,000/- per day then the same was exempted.It was further submitted that hostel was provided for less thanRs.100/- per day and therefore, the same was admissible forsaid exemption.
 
3. In so far as bundling of the service is concerned, it is submitted that there are provisions in said Section 66F of Finance Act, 1994 indicating that only suchservice can be bundled wherein an element of provisions of oneservice is combined with an element of provision of any otherservice. They submit that commercial training or coachingservices was independent of provision of hostel facility. Furtherevery service recipient of commercial training or coaching wasnot required to avail hostel facility. There were many studentswho were availing hostel facility but were not receiving service ofcommercial training or coaching and therefore, they cannot bebundled.
 
 
Reasoning of Judgement:The tribunal has provided the following judgements with respect to the above mentioned points
1.Relying on decision of Tribunal in the case of Rubic’s Rostrum Coaching Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), it was held that sale of bookswas not taxable activity and therefore, there was no service tax leviable on the sales value of books.

2. It was clarified by CBEC that if large number ofservice receivers of such bundle of services reasonably expectsuch services to be provided as a package then such a packagewould be treated as naturally bundled. Revenue has not broughtany evidence on record that large number of service receiversreasonable expect every provider of commercial training orcoaching service to provide hostel facility. The CBEC has also included that if the majority of serviceprovider in a particular area of business provide similar bundle ofservices then they should be bundled. Revenue has not broughtforward any evidence that majority of service providers in thefield of commercial coaching or training service provided hostelfacility. In terms of the criteria stated in the manner ofdetermining if the services are bundled as clarified by CBEC it is not possible to bundle service ofprovisions of hostel facility with commercial training or coaching. It was held that the provisions ofcommercial training or coaching service and provisions of hostelcannot be bundled under the provisions of Section 66F of theFinance Act, 1994.
 
3.The hostel facility is provided for less than Rs.100/- perday and therefore, it is entitled for exemption under NotificationNo.31/2011 dated 25 April, 2011 and Serial No.18 of NotificationNo.25/2012-ST. Therefore, the confirmation of servicetax on hostel charges was set aside.
 
Comment:-As we have entered the GST era and it has been 3 years, similar issues of bundling of service may arise as well. And in fact there are issues like printing services of books which are being a point dispute whether to be treated as composite supply or not. Hope this judgement be of help in deriving to conclusions.
Prepared By- CA Akanksha Bohra
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