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/2018-2019/3508

Will the Security Services supplied as in the nature of Pure Services to a Municipal Corporation be granted Exemption from GST under Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax Rate?

Case:  NATIONAL SECURITY SERVICES

Citation: 2019 (20) G.S.T.L. 457 (A.A.R. - GST)

Issue: Will the Security Services supplied as in the nature of Pure Services to a Municipal Corporation be granted Exemption from GST under Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax Rate?

Brief Facts: The applicant has entered into an agreement with Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC) to provide Security services to them. The Security Services are provided in form of providing Security guards; to Water Pump Houses, Purification Plants run by PCMC from where water supply is made to the city; to Hospitals and Dispensaries run by PCMC; for Solid Waste Management, Slum Improvement undertaken by PCMC; in relation to Urban Planning including Town Planning, which is for Public Safety at large.

Appellant Contention: The Appellant is of the view that all the Services that they provide to PCMC are covered in Article 243W of the Constitution, as functions entrusted to Municipality. The applicant has stated that the security guards provided by them are working under the overall supervision of the Security Guards, who are on the establishment of the PCMC and they are carrying out the entire function of the security. They have also cited the duties which are performed by their personnel when on duty under the PCMC. Moreover, the security guards provided by them are not mere assistants/helpers because they are fully responsible for the security of the entire premises and are also supposed to handle the emergency situation like fire, theft, etc., and are to coordinate with important organization like police, fire brigade, hospitals, etc.

 According to the Appellant, the term “Madatnis” i.e. assistant/helper used in the agreement is only a convenience term used by PCMC. It is to indicate that the Security Guards provided by them should work under the direction and supervision by PCMC. The Appellant has submitted a clarification from the Assistant Commissioner (Security) PCMC, Pune-411018 stating that even though the persons provided by the applicant are working under the supervision and directions of the security guards who are on the establishment of PCMC, such persons are doing the security work in relation to urban planning and public safety at large.

Respondent’s Contention and Reasoning of Judgment: The Respondent stated that before making any conclusion, it is necessary to study and then analyze the relevant Exemption Notification. Following is the extract of the same.

Pure services (excluding works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to the Central Government, State Government or Union territory or local authority or a Governmental authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution would be exempted.

It is thus clear that the applicant is providing pure services. The Respondent agreed that the said services are in relation to any functions entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243W of the Constitution. The agreement between the applicant and PCMC very clearly states that the applicant shall provide assistants to the Security Guards of PCMC. The invoice raised by the applicant mentions services rendered as, “Being round the clock helper to security service”. Providing assistance to the Security Guards of PCMC is an activity in relation to various functions as enumerated above which have been entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243W of the Constitution. Thereby the appellant is entitled the benefit of Exemption Notification.

Decision: Exemption allowed.

Comment: The Gist of the case is that the Security Services supplied as in the nature of Pure Services by the appellant to PCMC (a Municipal Corporation) will be granted Exemption from GST under Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax Rate. Recently Notification No. 29/2018-Central Tax (Rate), dated 31-12-2018 was issued wherein it has been stated that Security Service (services provided by way of supply of security personnel) provided by any person other than a body corporate to a registered person, located in the taxable territory would attract tax liability under Reverse Charge Mechanism. However, Since PCMC is municipality (a government structure); the said notification would not be applicable to it.

In a similar case of supplying security services i.e. in case of Ex-Servicemen Resettlement Society, [2019] 101 taxmann.com 477 (AAR-WEST BENGAL) was supplying Security Guards along with sweeping services to Medical colleges and Hospitals of West Bengal and Central Govt. Cancer Institute. In view of the foregoing Benefit of exemption from the payment of GST is not available to the Applicant under Notification No 12/2017-CT(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and WB Govt Gazette Notification-1136-FT dated 28.06.2017, as amended, for the supply of Security Services and the bundle of service that he describes as ‘Scavenging Services’.

Prepared by:  Adit Gupta

 

                                                                                              

  

 

 

 

 

 

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