Tribunal rules in favor of government undertaking on service tax dispute

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a government undertaking, in a case concerning service tax on amounts received from the State Government for vendor payments and on liquidated damages collected. It held that the amounts paid to vendors were reimbursements and not subject to service tax. Additionally, it determined that liquidated damages were not consideration for services and therefore not taxable. The Tribunal dismissed the Commissioner's appeal on penalty waiver, ultimately setting aside the service tax demands and ruling in favor of the appellant.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the amount received from the State Government for payment to vendors is susceptible to service tax.
2. Whether the amount collected as liquidated damages from vendors is susceptible to service tax.
3. Whether the penalty against the appellant should be waived under section 80 of the Finance Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Amount Received from State Government for Payment to Vendors:
The appellant, a wholly owned undertaking of the Government of Rajasthan, was appointed as a nodal agency for implementing various IT-related projects. The primary dispute was whether the amounts received from State Government Departments, which were paid to vendors, were subject to service tax.

The appellant argued that these amounts were reimbursements and not consideration for services provided. They contended that they acted as a pure agent, and service tax was already paid on the service charges they retained. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, citing section 67 of the Finance Act, which states that service tax is chargeable on the gross amount charged for such service. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in *Union of India vs. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.*, which held that reimbursable expenses cannot be included in the taxable value. The Tribunal concluded that the amounts paid to vendors were reimbursements and not consideration for services, thus not subject to service tax.

2. Amount Collected as Liquidated Damages:
The second issue was whether liquidated damages collected from vendors for breach of contract were subject to service tax under section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, which includes "agreeing to the obligation to tolerate an act" as a declared service.

The appellant argued that liquidated damages are not consideration for any service but a deterrent for breach of contract. The Tribunal referred to the definition of "service" under section 65B(44) and the declared services under section 66E(e), emphasizing that there must be a flow of consideration for agreeing to tolerate an act. The Tribunal cited the decision in *M/s. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax*, which held that penalties for breach of contract are not consideration for any service. The Tribunal concluded that liquidated damages are not subject to service tax.

3. Waiver of Penalty under Section 80:
The Commissioner appealed against the order dropping the penalty against the appellant, arguing that section 80 of the Finance Act was omitted after the show cause notice and order were issued. However, since the Tribunal set aside the entire demand, it found it unnecessary to examine the penalty waiver issue.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the orders dated 16.01.2017 and 18.05.2018, confirming the demands of service tax on the amounts received from the State Government for payment to vendors and on liquidated damages. The appeal by the Commissioner regarding the penalty was dismissed. The appellant's appeals were allowed, and the demands were not sustained.

---