Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2019-2020/3602

Whether service tax is leviable on the statutory/sovereign functions carried out under the provisions of the Act?
M/s Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) Final Order No. 20357/2020 dated 09.06.2020
Issue: Whether service tax is leviable on the statutory/sovereign functions carried out under the provisions of the Act?
Brief Facts:  KIADB are engaged in providing various taxable Services such as Renting of Immovable Property Services, Construction of Commercial and Residential Complexes, Business Support Services, Management, Maintenance or Repair Services, Manpower Recruitment and Supply Services, Works Contract Services, etc., to various clients. The appellant, KIADB did not obtain registration under service tax for the said services. KIADB is established by an enactment of the Legislature of Karnataka Act, i.e. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966. Appellant performs various statutory / sovereign functions assigned to it under provisions of KIAD Act. Revenue entertained the view that the appellants are liable to pay the service tax on various services rendered by them but they have not paid the service tax and not registered under the Finance Act, 1994.
 
Appellant’s Contention: The appellant contended before the CESTAT Bangalore as follows-
  1. The appellant contended that they are a Government undertaking and being a ‘State’ as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution of India are not liable to pay service tax. Further they are not undertaking any activities for profit motive. It was also contended that the appellant did not provide any construction related service. On the contrary, they engaged various contractors who provided services to the appellant. It was also contended that the figures adopted by the Department to demand service tax were nothing but cumulative figures of each year appearing in financial statements. The appellant has also raised the issue of error in quantification and wrong adoption of figures to arrive at the amount of service tax payable.
 
  1. No service tax can be imposed on the sovereign activities as also the statutory obligation of the Government. Various activities are being undertaken by the appellant as per the KIAD Act like promoting establishments and development of industrial areas, preparing scheme of development of industrial areas, acquisition of land by the state for development within the state of Karnataka on which Service tax shall not be imposed. Reliance has been placed upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nashik Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation [2018(9) GSTL 372 Bom.)] wherein the Bombay High Court has held that no service tax could be demanded on the charges collected by Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation in terms of the Maharastra Industrial Development Act, 1961 towards maintenance of the industrial areas, as the same is in the nature of statutory functions performed in terms of the statute. They further submitted that when the maintenance of industrial area itself is held to be statutory function, the main function of acquisition of land, development of such land in to industrial area and allotment of such land would certainly be a statutory function and does not attract the levy of service tax.
 
  1. It is submitted that appellant is a state Government undertaking and a creature of statute to exercise the power of eminent domain. Power of eminent domain is a sovereign function. Apart from being a sovereign authority, the appellant is a statutory authority under the provisions of law. It, inter alia, includes to promote orderly establishment of industries and to develop industrial areas.
 
  1. Appellant is not carrying out commercial activities for a consideration and the amount of deposit collected by the appellant is based on principles of rationality and reasonableness. It cannot fix prices arbitrarily.
 
  1. They also submitted that the entire demand is based on the information shown in the financial accounts and notes to accounts without considering the fact whether the said amounts are treated as income or assets in the books of account.
 
  1. As far as renting of immovable property service is concerned, it is submitted that constitutional validity of levy of service tax on renting of immovable property has already been referred to Nine Judges Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. UTV News Ltd. [2018(13) GSTL 3 (SC)]. They also submitted that service tax has been erroneously demanded on deposits collected by KIADB for the purpose of allotment of land. The said deposits are collected towards allotment of land and the same is adjusted against the sale consideration of the land and is not rent or lease charges. They further submitted that the renting of immovable property does not apply to vacant land. It was also submitted that no service tax is leviable on onetime upfront amount.
 
  1.  As far as construction of complex service is concerned, appellant does not provide construction service rather the appellant engages independent contractors to carry out the construction for the appellant.
 
  1. It has been contested that the demand of service tax under the head Business Support Service by saying that the appellants have not provided any support services to any person. Further the accounting heads considered for the purpose of computation of demands itself reflects that the said amounts are deposits towards various amenities including water supply etc. as far as demand of service tax under the head ‘management maintenance or repair service’, they submitted that the said amount is collected from the industrial units for maintenance work like infrastructure, roads, water lines, civil amenities buildings, power lines etc. and for this purpose, the appellant has engaged independent contractors for carrying out the activities and they did not carry out such activities personally.
 
  1. For the demand of service tax under the head ‘manpower recruitment or supply services’, it is submitted that the appellant did not provide any manpower for carrying out acquisition of land. The said activity cannot be subjected to tax under the category of manpower recruitment or supply service.
 
  1.  The appellant questions the quantification and also raised the argument that the appellant being arm of the State Government, there cannot be any question of having intention to evade payment of taxes and hence extended period cannot be invoked and hence penalty cannot be imposed.
 
 
Reasoning of Judgement: The tribunal after considering the facts of the case, have considered the opinion that the appellant is a statutory body discharging the statutory function as per the statute KIAD Act, 1966 and hence are not liable to pay service tax. Since it has been held that appellant is not liable to pay service tax at all, it is not worth discussing on the demand of service tax on individual services allegedly rendered by the appellant on which the learned Commissioner has confirmed the demand. In the result, by following the ratios of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Shri Ramtanu Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of MIDC and the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Employee Provident Fund Organisation (upheld by Apex Court), the impugned order is being set aside and the appeal of the appellant is allowed.
 
Comment:- It can be concluded that the Companies carrying out the statutory and sovereign functions for the development of industrial areas and being setup by an Act shall not be leviable to Service Tax. And the same has also been confirmed by the decision of Bangalore CESTAT.
 
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