CESTAT held that the appellant's arrangement with M/s X Pvt. Ltd. for operating car parking facilities in the mall basement and additional parking area was a profit-sharing service contract and not a lease of space. The Tribunal noted that the entire parking revenue was first credited to the appellant's bank account and only thereafter was the operator's share remitted, evidencing revenue sharing rather than fixed rental. Accordingly, the activity qualified as "services by way of vehicle parking to general public" eligible for exemption under the applicable notification, and not as "leasing of space for an entity for providing parking facility." Observing violation of judicial discipline by the lower authority, CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
CESTAT held that the appellant's arrangement with M/s X Pvt. Ltd. for operating car parking facilities in the mall basement and additional parking area was a profit-sharing service contract and not a lease of space. The Tribunal noted that the entire parking revenue was first credited to the appellant's bank account and only thereafter was the operator's share remitted, evidencing revenue sharing rather than fixed rental. Accordingly, the activity qualified as "services by way of vehicle parking to general public" eligible for exemption under the applicable notification, and not as "leasing of space for an entity for providing parking facility." Observing violation of judicial discipline by the lower authority, CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
