TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows appeal, sets aside service tax demands on Construction Services, citing relevant case laws.</h1> <h3>M/s. Rainbow Foundations Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise, Chennai Outer Commissionerate</h3> M/s. Rainbow Foundations Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise, Chennai Outer Commissionerate - TMI Issues:1. Taxability of Construction of Commercial Complex Service (CICS) for the period from November 2004 to May 2007.2. Taxability of Construction of Residential Complex Service (CRS) for the period from February 2007 to September 2007.3. Applicability of Works Contract Service (WCS) in the case.4. Interpretation of relevant case laws and their impact on the judgment.Taxability of Construction of Commercial Complex Service (CICS):The appellant was alleged to have rendered CICS without obtaining Service Tax Registration and payment of service tax. The demand for service tax on CICS for the specified period was confirmed in the Order-in-Original, which was upheld by the Commissioner of Service Tax. The appellant argued that the services were provided before they became taxable, relying on completed projects as evidence. The tribunal referred to the case of M/s. Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and concluded that services provided prior to June 1, 2007, could not be categorized under commercial or industrial construction service. The tribunal set aside the demand for CICS, allowing the appeal.Taxability of Construction of Residential Complex Service (CRS):Similar to CICS, the demand for service tax on CRS for the specified period was confirmed and upheld by the authorities. The appellant argued that the services were provided before they became taxable, emphasizing completed projects. The tribunal considered relevant case laws and concluded that the demand for service tax on CRS could not be sustained. The tribunal set aside the demand for CRS, allowing the appeal.Applicability of Works Contract Service (WCS):The appellant highlighted that no demand was made under Works Contract Service (WCS) despite the allegations related to construction services. The tribunal did not delve deeply into this issue, as the focus was on the taxability of CICS and CRS. However, the absence of a demand under WCS was noted in the context of the overall judgment.Interpretation of Relevant Case Laws:The appellant and the revenue relied on different case laws to support their contentions. The tribunal analyzed the case laws cited by both parties and found that the decision in the case of BCC Developers and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. was not applicable to the present case. On the other hand, the tribunal found that the case laws cited by the appellant supported their view. Ultimately, the tribunal set aside the impugned demands for service tax based on its interpretation of the relevant case laws and allowed the appeal with consequential benefits as per law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
