News Update

India received foreign remittance of USD 111 bn in 2022, says UNPitroda resigns as Chairman of Indian Overseas Congress over racist remarkGovt hosts workshop on improving Ease of Doing Business in Mining sectorI-T - Anything made taxable by rule-making authority u/s 17(2)(viii) should be 'perquisite' in form of 'fringe benefits or amenity': SCCus - Drawback - Revenue contends that appeal of exporter ought to have been dismissed by Tribunal as not maintainable since correct remedy was filing a revision application with Central government - Appeal disposed of: HCCus - CHA - AA has clearly brought out the modus adopted by the appellant and how he was a party to the entire under valuation exercise - Factual finding affirmed by Tribunal - No question of law arises for consideration: HCGST - Proper officer has not applied his mind while passing the order; confirmed demand by opining that reply is not satisfactory - Proper Officer is directed to withdraw all punitive actions taken against petitioner pursuant to impugned order: HCGST - Proper Officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion - Non-application of mind - Order set aside and matter remitted for re-adjudication: HCGST - Cancellation of registration for non-filing of returns - Suspension/revocation of license would be counterproductive and works against the interest of revenue - Pragmatic view needs to be taken to permit petitioner to carry on his business: HC86 flights of AI Express cancelled as crew goes on mass sick leaveTax Refund Conundrum - Odyssey of Legal MisstepsI-T- AO not barred from issuing more than one SCN; Fresh SCN seeking information is not without jurisdiction, more so where HC itself directed re-doing of assessment: HCMurthy launches Capacity Building on Design and Entrepreneurship programCash, liquor & drugs worth Rs 110 Cr seized from Jharkhand ahead of pollsI-T- Appeal before CIT(A) (NFAC) is rightly dismissed where it has been delayed by over one year without just & reasonable cause: ITATPoll-induced stress: 2 Bihar officials die of heart attack at polling boothsSixth Edition of Commandants' Conclave held in PuneSome Gujarat villages keep away from polls over unfulfilled demands from governmentRoof-hugging inflation nudges Argentina to print first lot of 10,000 notes of pesoInvestigation finds presence of ‘boys club’ strands of culture at American bank regulatorUS cancels licence to some firms found exporting materials to Huawei
 
ST on Toll charges - If on basis of agreement, contractor is authorised to collect toll charges from users and entire activity is done on BOT basis, there is no ST liability - Demand of Rs 30 Cr set aside: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JAN 22, 2013: THE appellant is an ideal road builder and engaged in construction of highways i.e widening of the existing two-lane carriageway from KM 0/115 to KM 23/509 of Thane-Bhiwandi bye-pass road. The Public Works Department (PWD) of Government of Maharashtra awarded the contract for this purpose. To compensate the appellant for undertaking the work they were authorised to collect tolls from the users of the road at various places. The appellant collected tolls from the users. Let aside the fact that the departmental officers had commuted by this road and waved their identity card for not paying toll on more than one occasion, when it came to Service Tax, they were not the one to waive the demand notice.

The department was of the view that the appellant was required to discharge service tax liability on this activity under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service"and accordingly a show-cause notice dated 21/10/2011 was issued demanding a service tax of Rs.30,30,07,734/- on the total toll collection of Rs.264,06,80,930/- during the period 2006-07 to 2010-11.

The Commissioner, Service Tax, Mumbai did the rest inasmuch as he passed an O-in-O on 31/08/2012 saddling the applicant with the proposals made in the demand notice.

So, the appellant is before the CESTAT.

The appellant referred to the Board Circular no. 152/3/2012-ST dated 22/02/2012 and said that the Rs.30.30 Crore demand is not sustainable.

The Revenue representative merely reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority.

The Bench after dispensing with the requirement of pre-deposit of the adjudged dues took up the appeal for consideration and disposal.

After reproducing the Board Circular dated 22/02/2012 referred by the applicant, the CESTAT observed -

"5.3 From the above circular it is clear that if on the basis of an agreement between the State authority and the concessionaire for construction of roads, the contractor is authorised to collect the toll charges from the users of the roads for the services rendered and the entire activity is done on Build-Own/Operate-Transfer basis, there is no service tax liability.

5.4 Construction of roads has been specifically excluded from the scope of service tax levy both under "Commercial and Industrial Construction Service"and "Works Contract Service". Further repair and maintenance of roads have also been exempted from service tax retrospectively in this year's budget. Thus the intention of the Government is to keep out road construction activity from the purview of service tax. If that be so, how can service tax be levied on the very same activity under Business Auxiliary Service? Such a view does not appeal to any reason or logic."

Holding that in view of the clarification given by the Board the impugned order does not sustain, the Bench set aside the same and allowed the appeal.

In passing: It is common practice for the field formations to ignore the munificence given by the Central Board of Excise & Customs through its Circulars. In the present case, the Board Circular is dated 22.02.2012 yet the Commissioner has turned a blind eye to the same and passed the o-in-o confirming the ST demand of more than Rs.30 Crores on 31 st August, 2012. Thankfully, the case has been decided by the CESTAT before Circular 967 was born!

The world is a fine place, and worth fighting for - Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls

(See 2013-TIOL-136-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.