Completion certificate evidence controls service tax exposure on property construction and unsupported Cenvat credit claims fail.

Construction of flats, shops and residential complexes intended for sale became subject to service tax from 01.07.2010, and the exclusion applies only where a valid completion certificate from the competent authority shows completion before that date. Documents referring merely to part development work or conditional occupation were treated as insufficient to prove pre-levy completion, so the receipts remained within the taxable net. A claim for Cenvat credit and related deductions also required invoice-wise payment details and reliable supporting evidence; unsupported assertions and unverified challans were insufficient to establish entitlement.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether service tax was payable on consideration received for construction of flats, shops and residential complex where the appellant failed to produce a valid completion or occupancy certificate showing completion before the levy date of 01.07.2010; (ii) Whether the appellant was entitled to Cenvat credit and related deductions on the basis of the records produced.

Issue (i): Whether service tax was payable on consideration received for construction of flats, shops and residential complex where the appellant failed to produce a valid completion or occupancy certificate showing completion before the levy date of 01.07.2010.

Analysis: Service tax on construction of complex became applicable to construction of residential complexes intended for sale from 01.07.2010, subject to the exclusion where no amount is received before grant of completion certificate by the competent authority. The relevant certificate for Greater Mumbai had to be issued by the municipal authority under the municipal law. The documents relied upon by the appellant referred only to part development work and conditional occupation, and did not establish a full completion or occupancy certificate issued by the competent authority. In the absence of such proof, the receipts relatable to the relevant flats and shops could not be taken outside the taxable net.

Conclusion: The issue is decided against the appellant and in favour of Revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant was entitled to Cenvat credit and related deductions on the basis of the records produced.

Analysis: The claim for Cenvat credit was not supported by the requisite invoice-wise payment details or other reliable evidence. The asserted tax payments and supporting challans were also not verified from the record. In the absence of proof, the claimed credit and related deduction could not be granted.

Conclusion: The issue is decided against the appellant and in favour of Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the service tax demand failed, the municipal documents were held insufficient to establish pre-levy completion, and the appellant also failed to substantiate the credit claim.

Ratio Decidendi: For construction services intended for sale, tax liability continues unless the assessee proves completion by a valid certificate from the competent authority before the levy date, and deductions or credits must be established by reliable documentary evidence.

---