TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 344
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....complex service', sought refund of Rs. 1,36,072/- in application filed on 10th April 2017 following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Suresh Kumar Bansal v. Union of India [2016 (43) STR 3 (Del)] declaring that, in the absence of machinery provision for segregation of service component of consideration, the levy would be ultra vires. The original authority rejected the claim of the appellant on the ground that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay, in Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industries v. Union of India and Others [2012 (25) STR 305(Bom)] upholding the validity of the levy including the Explanation inserted in section 65 (105)(zzh) of Finance Act, 1994 by Finance Act, 2010, took precedence over that of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n a composite transaction. Hence there is no bar on taxation of such composite transaction. 6. Both these decisions pertain to the period when the description of each and every activity that was intended to be taxed was enumerated separately and distinctly. With effect from 1st July 2012, the definitional framework of existing entries, and any other service, was erased to render all activities, save those in the negative list, to be liable to tax with further addition, through section 65B of Finance Act, 1994, of deemed services that were also taxable. The decision cited by appellant herein pertains to the pre-negative list regime that excludes any activity not enumerated therein to be beyond the scope of taxation; likewise the decision r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that builders/promoters/developers who develop residential complexes - such as the group housing project developed by the builder in this case - and sell dwelling units in the complexes to prospective users render taxable service under Section 65(105)(zzzza) of the Act, that is, services in relation to a works contract. 23. Although such composite contracts for development of complex and sale of units therein would fall within the scope of works contract as held by the Supreme Court in Larsen and Toubro v. State of Karnataka (supra), we do not propose to examine whether services involved in construction of complexes is exigible to service tax as services in relation to execution of a works contract falling within the scope of Section 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e sense, the services subsumed in construction - services in relation to a construction the complex - are rendered for the benefit of the buyer. However, but for the legal fiction introduced by the impugned explanation, such value addition would be outside the scope of services because sensu stricto no services, as commonly understood, are rendered in a contract to sell immovable property. 28. The impugned explanation was enacted to principally bring about parity in various forms of arrangements entered into between the builders and prospective buyers for the purposes of levy of service tax. The object was to obliterate - for the purposes of levy of service tax - the distinction between a person who engages a builder to construct a unit ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al owner of the property. At the conclusion of the contract and completion of the payments relating thereto, another instrument called 'Sale Deed' is executed on payment of appropriate stamp duty. This instrument represents the legal transfer of property from the promoter to the buyer. 8.4 In other places a different pattern is followed. At the initial stage, instruments are created between the promoter and all the prospective buyers (which may include a person who has provided the vacant land for the construction), known as 'Sale of Undivided Portion of The Laid'. This instrument transfers the property right to the buyers though it does not demarcate a part of land, which can be associated with a particular buyer. Since the vacant land ....