Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Service tax on composite works contracts pre-June 2007 disallowed; post-June 2007 taxable under 'works contract'.</h1> <h3>M/s Onkar Lal Saini Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, JAIPUR</h3> The Tribunal held that the levy of service tax on composite works contracts before June 01, 2007, under 'construction of complex' service was not ... Construction of complex service - construction of a single residential unit - Demand of service tax for the period 2005-06 to 2008-09 - work order was for building independent residential buildings on behalf of the Housing Board and each house that was constructed was an independent residential unit - HELD THAT:- The definition of a ‘residential complex’ leaves no manner of doubt that it would be a complex comprising of a building or buildings, having more than twelve residential units. In other words a complex may have a building having more than twelve residential units or a complex may have more than one building each having more than twelve residential units. Independent buildings having twelve or less than twelve residential units would not be covered by the definition of ‘residential complex’. In the present case, the appellant had constructed independent buildings having one residential unit only. Thus, even if the appellant had constructed more than 12 independent buildings, the nature of activity would not be ‘construction of complex’ and, therefore, the service tax could be levied. Levy of service tax on the appellant under ‘construction of complex’ service cannot be sustained. Issues Involved:1. Levy of Service Tax on composite works contracts before June 01, 2007.2. Taxability of services under 'construction of complex' after June 01, 2007.3. Definition and applicability of 'construction of complex' service.Detailed Analysis:1. Levy of Service Tax on composite works contracts before June 01, 2007:The Tribunal examined whether Service Tax could be levied on composite contracts involving the supply of goods/materials during the execution of civil constructions before June 01, 2007. It cited the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Central Excise, Kerala vs. Larsen & Toubro, which clarified that service rendered in a works contract cannot be covered under any other category of service prior to June 01, 2007. The Supreme Court emphasized that the service tax charging section must specifically lay down that the levy of service tax can only be on works contracts and only on the service element derived from the gross amount charged, less the value of property in goods transferred in the execution of the works contract. The Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in observing that prior to June 01, 2007, a composite works contract could be subjected to service tax under 'construction of complex' service. Therefore, the levy of service tax for services provided prior to June 01, 2007, under 'construction of complex' service cannot be sustained.2. Taxability of services under 'construction of complex' after June 01, 2007:For the period after June 01, 2007, the Tribunal held that demands could not be confirmed under 'construction of complex' service since it would be taxable only under 'works contract'. The Tribunal referenced a Division Bench judgment in Emaar MGF Construction Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, which reiterated that a Composite Works Contract cannot be taxed under 'construction of complex' service as the scope is limited to cover contracts of service simpliciter only.3. Definition and applicability of 'construction of complex' service:The Tribunal analyzed whether the work undertaken by the appellant for the Housing Board would be covered under 'construction of complex' service. Section 65(30a) of the Finance Act defines 'construction of complex' as the construction of a new residential complex or a part thereof, among other services. A 'residential complex' is defined under section 65(91a) as a complex comprising a building or buildings having more than twelve residential units. The Tribunal noted that independent buildings having twelve or fewer residential units would not be covered by the definition of 'residential complex'. In this case, the appellant constructed independent buildings with one residential unit each, which does not fall under 'construction of complex' service. This view was supported by previous Tribunal judgments in Macro Marvel Projects Ltd. and A.S. Sikarwar vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore, which clarified that service tax could only be demanded if the building concerned had more than 12 residential units.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the levy of service tax on the appellant under 'construction of complex' service cannot be sustained. The impugned order dated October 24, 2013, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found