Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Failure to issue mandatory ASMT-10 notice vitiates GST proceedings: Rajasthan High Court. *  GST SCN against dead proprietor invalid: Orissa High Court *  GST registration revived despite time-barred appeal, subject to full tax payment: Himachal Pradesh HC *  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 
Subject News *  Overseas marketing & support services are export of services, not intermediary services: CESTAT. *  Duty paid through CENVAT credit can’t be demanded again in cash: CESTAT *  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   

Comments

(kunal reshamwala) Posted On: 17 Sep, 2012

Whether there is no cenvat credit possible when the service provided is 'Renting of Immovable Property' Kindly clarify.

Under negative list, every such activity which falls in the definition of “service” as given in clause 44 of section 65B of the Finance Act are taxable unless otherwise exempted. The exemptions to certain services have been given in the negative list and also in notification no. 25/2012-ST DT 20.6.12. The following exemptions are related to renting of immovable property services as given in negative list and mega exemption notification:- Under Negative list:- •At clause no. (m) of section 44:- Renting of residential dwelling for use as residence. Under mega exemption notification:- •At entry no. 5:- Renting of precincts of a religious place meant for general public. • At entry no. 9:- Services provided to or by an educational institution in respect of education exempted from service tax, by way of,- (a) auxiliary educational services; or (b) renting of immovable property; • At entry no. 18:- Renting of hotels, inn, guest house, club, campsite or other commercial places meant for residential or lodging purpose, having declared tariff of a room below rupees one thousand per day or equivalent is exempt. Since the above referred services are totally exempted under service tax law, no Cenvat Credit is available if the service provider is SOLELY providing these services. However, concept of declared service has also been introduced in the negative list era where certain activities are declared to be a service for the purpose of levying the service tax. The list of declared services has been prescribed in section 66E which reads as follows:- “66E. The following shall constitute declared services, namely:- (a) renting of immovable property; (b) construction of a complex, building, civil structure or a part thereof, including a complex or building intended for sale to a buyer, wholly or partly, except where the entire consideration is received after issuance of completion certificate by the competent authority. Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause,- (I) the expression "competent authority" means the Government or any authority authorised to issue completion certificate under any law for the time being in force and in case of non-requirement of such certificate from such authority, from any of the following, namely:- (A) architect registered with the Council of Architecture constituted under the Architects Act, 1972; or (20 of 1972.) (B) chartered engineer registered with the Institution of Engineers (India); or (C) licensed surveyor of the respective local body of the city or town or village or development or planning authority; (II) the expression "construction" includes additions, alterations, replacements or remodelling of any existing civil structure; (c) temporary transfer or permitting the use or enjoyment of any intellectual property right; (d) development, design, programming, customisation, adaptation, upgradation, enhancement, implementation of information technology software; (e) agreeing to the obligation to refrain from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act; (f) transfer of goods by way of hiring, leasing, licensing or in any such manner without transfer of right to use such goods; (g) activities in relation to delivery of goods on hire purchase or any system of payment by installments; (h) service portion in the execution of a works contract; (i) service portion in an activity wherein goods, being food or any other article of human consumption or any drink (whether or not intoxicating) is supplied in any manner as a part of the activity.” Thus, the list of services prescribed under “Declared services” includes the “Renting of immovable property services”. Thus, all the types of renting of immovable property services are taxable undoubtedly other than those prescribed under negative list and mega exemption notification as discussed above. Further, Notification no. 26/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012 prescribes the abatement of 40% in case of "6. Renting of hotels, inns, guest houses, clubs, campsites or other commercial places meant for residential or lodging purposes." Thus, the abatement of 40% is allowed in case of renting of hotels, inns, guest houses, clubs, campsites or other commercial places meant for residential or lodging purposes. Further, where the abatement is claimed for these services, the credit is not allowed on ‘Inputs’ and ‘Capital goods’. As such, where these services are provided; the credit of “Input services” is allowed alongwith abatement. In respect of all the other types of immovable properties (which are taxable beyond any doubt by virtue of section 66E); the service tax is payable to the full applicable rates. Further, no specific prohibition has been imposed regarding the allowability of Cenvat Credit on these services. As such, we are of opinion that the Cenvat Credit is allowed on all the other types of renting of immovable property services. However, if the various types of immovable property services are provided, some exempted and some taxable, provisions of rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 will apply accordingly. Lastly, in context of service tax by way of positive list, circular no. 98/1/2008-ST dated 4.1.2008 was issued regarding Cenvat Credit on renting of immovable property service. The relevant portion of this circular is as follows:- Reference Code- 096.01 / 04.01.08 Issue:- Commercial or industrial construction service [section 65(105)(zzq)] or works contract service [section 65(105)(zzzza)] is used for construction of an immovable property. Renting of an immovable property is leviable to service tax [section 65(105)(zzzz)]. Whether or not, commercial or industrial construction service or works contract service used for construction of an immovable property, could be treated as input service for the output service namely renting of immovable property service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004? Clarification:- Right to use immovable property is leviable to service tax under renting of immovable property service. Commercial or industrial construction service or works contract service is an input service for the output namely immovable property. Immovable property is neither subjected to central excise duty nor to service tax. Input credit of service tax can be taken only if the output is a ‘service’ liable to service tax or a ‘goods’ liable to excise duty. Since immovable property is neither ‘service’ or ‘goods’ as referred to above, input credit cannot be taken. Thus, in the above referred circular, it was clarified that the credit on input services is not available if the services provided by the assessee are renting of immovable property services. However, now the immovable property has been specifically declared as taxable service under section 66E. Further no specific restriction has been imposed regarding the availment of Cenvat Credit on these services in context of negative list. Thus, we can say that the above circular will not hold good now under negative list scenario. We hope the above will satisfy your query. Disclaimer: This opinion is given to best of knowledge and belief. The service tax is a complicated law and interpretations of the law keep on changing based on judicial discipline and Board’s clarifications. Our opinion is also subject to the same.
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