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 Laws/2010-11/1109

Whether the services of construction of residential quarters provided to the Government for providing the same as residential accommodation fro the employees is taxable under the category of ‘Construction of Complex Service’.
 

Prepared By:
CA. Rajani Thanvi &
Arpita Birla

 

 
 
Case: - KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD. V/s COMMR. OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD
 
Citation: - 2002 (21) S.T.R. 115 (Tri.-Ahmd.)
 

Issue:- Whether the services of construction of residential quarters provided to the Government for providing the same as residential accommodation fro the employees is taxable under the category of ‘Construction of Complex Service’.
 
Brief Facts:-
M/s. Khurana Engineering Limited was providing construction services. Central Public Works Department (CPWD) has given a tender for construction of 80 residential quarters for Income Tax department which was executed by them. But the demand under the category of Construction of Complex service was raised with interest and penalty. Whereas the services were provided to Govt. of India for providing the residential accommodation for the employees of the Income Tax department.
 
Appellant’s Contention:- 
The appellant contended that the quarters constructed by the appellant are provided to Govt. for providing the same as residential accommodation for the employees of the Income Tax Department.  For this purpose the appellant forced on the analysis of definition of the construction  of complex services given under the clause (30a) of Section 65 which provides that personal use includes the complex for use as residence by another person on rent or without consideration. As such the services provided by the appellant is covered y exclusion, which provides that definition of service does not include the complex which is constructed by a person directly engaging any other person for designing or planning of the layout and the construction of such complex. Consequently the 80 flats provided by Govt. of India to employees of Income Tax department on rent will be excluded from the definition of construction services.  The reliance placed upon the reply given by the Central Board of Customs and Excise to National Building Construction Corporation Limited (NBCC), vide Letter No. F. No. 332/16/2010-TRU., dated 24-5-2010, by the appellant.
 
Respondent’s Contention:-
According to respondents contention it is not correct to say that service has been provided to Govt. of India directly. He submits that the land is owned by Income Tax department and Income Tax department has requested the CPWD to construct the quarters for them and funds have been made available to CPWD by Ministry of Finance for this purpose. CPWD in reality has acted as a bridge between Income tax department and the contractor and after the residential complex is constructed, the same was handed over by CPWD to Income tax department and therefore, in terms of the clarification issued by the Board also, the appellant would be liable to pay service tax.
He also considered the letter relied upon by the learned advocate and submitted that in that letter, it has been clarified by the Board that if NBCC were to construct residential accommodation and handover to Govt. of India, there would be no liability to service tax. However, if NBCC were to entrust the work to sub-contractor and such sub-contractor constructed the residential complex and handed over to NBCC who in turn handed over the same to Govt. of India, service tax would be leviable.

Reasoning of Judgment:-
The Learned Tribunal has find that the CPWD and Income Tax department cannot be treated as separate entities just because service has been provided to CPWD who in turn handed over the quarters to Income Tax Department. Further the Tender starts with words “Tenders are invited on behalf of the President of India.”  Also the Guarantee executed by the contractor and agreement entered by the contractor have been accepted by CPWD for and on behalf of the President of India. It is well known that various departments of Govt., of India act on behalf of the President of India and therefore, it cannot be said that CPWD can be equated with NBCC which is a Public Sector under taking. It is also well settled that Public Sector undertakings are not considered as Govt., departments and also cannot be considered as “STATE”. Further, there was no any agreement between Income tax department and CPWD for the purpose of construction of residential complex. Invariably when two parties are independent entities, there would be an agreement. Hence absence of any agreement between CPWD and Income tax department also clears that these are not separate entities. Further, since on behalf of the President of India contractors are entered into, agreements are entered into and bonds are accepted, Govt. of India is treated as “Person”. Therefore the exclusion clause in the definition is applicable to the Govt. of India also. 

Further the learned Tribunal also sustained the alternative submissions made by the appellant that the show cause notice was issued on 4-10-2007 whereas, the service tax was payable for the period from 16-6-2005 to 30-7-2007 and therefore, a portion of the demand is time barred. As the CPWD and Income Tax department are to be treated as part of the Govt. of India and therefore, services provide by appellant would not be liable to service tax. Further, as per agreement the service receiver is liable to pay service tax, in case of liability of any tax. So the appellants has not made suppression or mis-declaration of the facts to avoid payment of service tax since if the service tax was liable, as per the contract, CPWD was liable to pay service tax. Under these circumstances, invocation of extended time limit cannot be justified in this case. For the another alternative submission that the contract between the appellant and the CPWD was a works contract and VAT has been paid treating the same as works contract and therefore, no service tax was liable to be paid for the period prior to 1-6-2007, the tribunal find the case of Cemex Engineers v. Commissioner of Service Tax Cochin - 2010 (17)S.T.R. 534 (Tri. - Bang.) relevant to the circumstances.

Decision:
Appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.
 

-----------------

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