Tribunal rules in favor of appellant on service tax under Composition Scheme

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for service tax under the Composition Scheme for works contracts up to 30.06.2012 and determining service tax liability post-01.07.2012. It was held that the Composition Scheme is optional, not mandatory. Additionally, no service tax could be imposed on the goods component if VAT had already been paid. Consequently, the demand for interest and penalties under Sections 75, 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, was also dismissed. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order dated 27.08.2018 was overturned with consequential relief granted to the appellant.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of the Composition Scheme for payment of service tax on works contracts up to 30.06.2012.
2. Determination of service tax liability for works contracts from 01.07.2012.
3. Imposition of interest and penalties under Sections 75, 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Applicability of the Composition Scheme for payment of service tax on works contracts up to 30.06.2012:

The appellant provided finishing services on a works contract basis and paid VAT on the goods component as per the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, while paying service tax on the service component. The Revenue argued that since the appellant did not separately invoice for goods and services, it should have paid service tax under the Composition Scheme. The Tribunal noted that the Composition Scheme is an option and cannot be enforced upon the taxpayer. It was highlighted that the term "shall" in the Composition Scheme indicates an option available to the taxpayer, not a mandatory requirement. The Tribunal cited the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana's ruling in Tiara Advertising versus Union of India, emphasizing that the Department cannot choose an option for the taxpayer. Consequently, the demand for service tax based on enforcing the Composition Scheme for the period up to 30.06.2012 was set aside.

2. Determination of service tax liability for works contracts from 01.07.2012:

From 01.07.2012, service tax became payable on all services except those in the negative list, including the service portion in the execution of works contracts. The appellant argued that it paid VAT on the goods component as per the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, and service tax should only be charged on the service component. The Revenue contended that since the actual value of goods transferred was not available, the appellant should determine the service tax as per Rule 2A(ii) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, which prescribes paying service tax on 70% of the total amount for certain works contracts. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Safety Retreading Co. (P) Ltd. versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem, which held that the value attributable to the transfer of property in goods cannot be subjected to service tax if VAT has already been paid. The Tribunal concluded that no service tax could be levied on the goods component of the composite works contract if VAT has been paid on it. Thus, the demand for the period post-01.07.2012 was also set aside.

3. Imposition of interest and penalties under Sections 75, 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994:

Since the demand for service tax did not sustain, the Tribunal held that the demand for interest under Section 75 and the imposition of penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, also did not survive.

Conclusion:

The impugned order dated 27.08.2018 was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant. The Tribunal pronounced the order in court on 18/11/2021.

---