News Update

US Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha ElectionsGST - Once Appellate Authority comes to the conclusion that SCN was issued by an officer who was not competent; reply was also considered by an incompetent authority and the Competent Authority had not applied its independent mind, Appellate Authority could not have assumed original jurisdiction and proceeded further with the matter: HC7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farI-T - Initial burden of proof rested on assessee to substantiate his claim of having incurred expenditure on improvement of property: ITATTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresI-T - Agricultural income can be treated by ITO as undisclosed income in absence of any substantial / corroborative material to prove same: ITATCanada arrests three persons in alleged killing of Sikh separatistI-T - Income from sale of property has to be classified & characterised only in manner of computation as per section 45(2): ITATCus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political events
 
ST - One-time maintenance charges collected from flat owner by builder is not chargeable to tax under category of Maintenance and Management of immovable property: CESTAT

 

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, DEC 19, 2018: THIS is a Revenue appeal.

The respondent is registered under the category of 'Construction of residential complex service, construction of industrial and commercial structures'.

During the course of audit, it was found that in addition to sale price of individual dwelling unit, they had charged and received certain amounts from unit holders as maintenance charges of the building under construction till possession of it is handed over to Society.

The case of the department is that as per paragraph 6 of Circular No. B1/6/2005-TRU dated 27.6.2005 w.e.f. 16.6.2005, maintenance and management of immovable property (in this case, the building under construction till possession is handed over to Society) are provided as per the terms and conditions of the agreement to sale of the property between the dwelling owner and service provider; that these activities fall under the ambit of Service Tax and liable for service tax w.e.f. 16.6.2005.

The adjudicating authority confirmed the service tax demand under the category of Maintenance and Repair service and also imposed penalties.

However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside this order and, therefore, Revenue is aggrieved by the same.

The AR justified the order of the original authority by placing reliance on the decision in Satya Prakash Builders Pvt. Ltd. - 2017-TIOL-1475-CESTAT-DEL.

The Bench considered the submissions made by the AR and observed thus -

+ Respondent is collecting repair and maintenance charges under the statutory obligation provided in Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963.

+ The respondent is under the obligation of the said Act, collecting the maintenance charges from the dwelling unit owner and transferring it to the actual service provider.

The CESTAT further noted that the issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the case of Kumar Beheray Rathi vs. CCE, Pune-III - 2013-TIOL-1806-CESTAT-MUM and where it is held that -

Appellants are not in the business of maintenance or repair service or management of immovable property - they are collecting one-time maintenance charges from their buyers to whom they have sold flats - they are only paying on behalf of various buyers of flats to various authorities (Municipal Corporation, Revenue authorities etc.) and various service providers (such as security agency, cleaning service providers etc.) and they are not charging anything on their own - the payments are made on cost basis and the same is debited from the deposit account - They act only as trustee or as pure agent - When the co-operative society is formed even the deposit account is shifted to Flat Owner's Co-operative Society - this is a statutory obligation on the appellants in terms of sections 5 & 6 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, sale, management and transfer) Act, 1963 - Appellants cannot be held as provider of maintenance or repair service - Order set aside and appeals allowed.

Following the said judgment, the Tribunal concluded that the maintenance charges collected from the flat owner under the obligation as per the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963, would not be chargeable to tax in the hands of the builder.

The decision cited by the AR was distinguished on the ground that the same did not relate to Maharashtra and no similar Act was invoked.

The impugned order was upheld and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

(See 2018-TIOL-3800-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.