News Update

CBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silverFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerCentre receives Rs 18.5 lakh crore tax revenue upto Feb monthUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayExpert Committee on developing GIFT IFSC as 'Global Finance and Accounting Hub' submits report to IFSCAIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEADefence Production issues notification for re-organisation of DGQAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of Lokpal
 
ST - Leasing of land by Corporation on own account to pvt individuals on commercial consideration cannot be said to be sovereign function at all as normally understood - land given on lease is amenable to ST under Renting of Immovable property w.e.f 1.7.2010 - Pre-deposit ordered of Rs185 cr: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, SEPTEMBER 22, 2014: THE Commissioner of Service Tax-I, Mumbai confirmed a service tax demand of Rs.536,31,86,244/- alongwith interest thereon by classifying the service rendered by the appellant MIDC under the category of "Renting of Immovable Property" for the period 1.6.2007 to 31.3.2012. Penalties were also imposed.

Before the CESTAT the appellant submitted that they had been created under the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 inter alia for securing orderly establishment of industrial areas and industrial estates in the State of Maharashtra and thus the activities undertaken is a sovereign function undertaken on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra. Reference is also made to the Resolution No. IDC 1079/1966/IND.14 dated 11.9.1986 wherein Clause (x) thereof it is stated that legal relationship between Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and the Government shall be that of an agent of the Government inasmuch as the appellant is acting as an agent of the State of Maharashtra.

Reliance is also placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation vs Hari Om Enterprises (2009) 16 SCC 208 (SC) and the decision of the Tribunal in Electrical Inspectorate, Government of Karnataka vs CST - 2007-TIOL-2175-CESTAT-BANG. It is further submitted that in appellant's own case, the Tribunal vide a series of orders dated 12.7.2012 - 2012-TIOL-1290-CESTAT-MUM, 2.9.2013 and 26.5.2013 had granted stay in respect of certain activities undertaken by the appellant such as maintenance of public utility services including roads, supply of water, street light, drainage etc. and held that since the appellant is a public authority they are not liable to service tax.

The AR submitted that the activity undertaken by the appellant is nothing but leasing of land&would amount to 'Renting of immovable property' and hence liable to service tax. Reference is made to the decision in CIDCO - 2014-TIOL-1368-CESTAT-MUM where in an identical set of facts, this Tribunal had taken a prima facie view that service tax is payable on the lease premium and lease rent and accordingly directed pre-deposit of the service tax demanded for the normal period and, therefore, the appellant should be put to terms.

The Bench observed -

++ From the provisions of the MIDC Act it is clear that the Corporation has its own identity apart from that of Maharashtra Government and operates independently of the Government. The receipts of the corporation are credited to its own fund and do not go the consolidated fund of the State. If that be so, the activities undertaken by it cannot be construed as functions of the State. The leasing of land by the Corporation on its own account to private individuals on commercial consideration cannot be said to be a sovereign function at all as normally understood. Sovereign functions are those of the nature of conduct of external affairs, defence, maintenance of law and justice, currency, coinage and taxation, undertaken for the benefit of public at large and both the income and expenditure in respect of these activities get credited to / expended from the consolidated fund of the State. In the present case none of these conditions get satisfied and, therefore, we are of the prima facie view that the functions undertaken by the Corporation are not sovereign functions.

++ The appellant is undertaking lease of land in two stages. In the first stage an agreement to lease the land to eligible applicants on payment of premium is entered into subject to construction of commercial buildings on the land and once the construction is completed, a lease agreement is entered into on payment of lease rental. The facts involved are identical to the one considered by this Tribunal in the case of CIDCO Ltd (cited supra)… In the said decision, the Tribunal further noted that as per the definition of taxable service in Section 65 (105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994, if vacant land is given on lease or licence for construction of building or temporary structure at a later stage to be used for furtherance of business or commerce, the said activity would be leviable to service tax under renting of immovable property with effect from 1.7.2010. Therefore, in the present case also, the activity undertaken by the appellant would be amenable to service tax with effect from 1.7.2010, if not earlier.

Noting that the appellant is a Government Corporation and prima facie allegation of suppression and mis-statement of facts would not arise, the Bench directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of Rs.185 crores (which is the service tax demand for the normal period of limitation) within a period of 12 weeks and report compliance.

(See 2014-TIOL-1809-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023