TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 638
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... TMI 926 - CESTAT • PC Snehal Construction Co. vs CST 2022 (9) TMI 390-CESTAT • Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. GST 2018 (9) TMI 1149-CESTAT 3. Learned authorized representative relies on the impugned order. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that it is not in dispute that the residential house constructed by the appellant were used by Essar Limited for its own staff. The appellants have claimed that the said use amounts to the personal use as defined in the definition of residential complex and therefore, the service provided by them is not covered under the definition of construction of complex service. It is seen that the identical service has been defined by Tribunal in the case of CR Patel. In the said case following has been observed. "This appeal has been filed by M/s. CR Patel against demand of service tax as "Works Contract Service". 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that they were engaged by Gujarat State Police Housing Corporation Ltd. (GSPHCL). The construct residences for police personal. Learned Counsel pointed out that the service provided by them is covered under the definition of "Wor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(b) and (c); or (e) turnkey projects including engineering, procurement and construction or commissioning (EPC) projects; (Explanation to Section 65 (105) (zzzza) of Finance Act, 1994) 4.2The definition of residential complex excludes from the levy of Service Tax"complex which is constructed by a person directly engaging any other person for designing or planning of the lay out and the construction of such complex is intended for personal use as residence by such persons." This expression has been interpreted by Tribunal in the case of Sima Engineering- 2018 (5) TMI 405(Tri.-Chennai), wherein after examining this conclusion para 7 & 8 as follows: "7. Undisputedly, the appellants have entered into an agreement with TNPHCL for providing services in relation to construction of residential complex. However, these are meant for use of police personnel. The said issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Nithesh Estates (supra), wherein the Tribunal has observed as under:- "7.1 In this case there is no dispute and it clearly emerges that the residential complex was built for M/s. ITC Ltd. And appellant was the main contractor. Appellant had ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... service tax need not be paid by the builder/developer who has constructed the complex. If the builder/developer constructs the complex himself, there would be no liability of service tax at all. Further in this case it was different totally, the appellant, has engaged sub-contractors and therefore rightly all the sub-contractors have paid the service tax. In such a situation in our opinion, there is no liability on the appellant to pay the service tax." 4.3 The said decision was followed by the Tribunal in the case of Lanco Tanjore Power Co. Ltd. (supra) wherein the Tribunal discussed as under:- "7. Construction of residential complex activity was carried out by the assessee for M/s. Lanco. It is submitted that such residential units were constructed for use as quarters of the employees of M/s. Lanco. It is evident from the facts of the case that M/s. Lanco has engaged the assessee with the specific purpose of construction of such residential units which are meant for personal use of theemployeesofM/s.Lanco.Weextractbelowthestatutorydefinitionofsection65(91a)oftheFinanceAct,1994:- "Residential complex" means any complex comprising of- (i) a buil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the appellant is covered by exclusion, which provides that definition of service does not include the complex which is constructed by a person directly engaging any other person for designing or planning of the layout and the construction of such complex. In this case, the Govt. of India provides 80 flats to Income Tax department on rent and therefore, it is excluded from the definition of construction services. He also relies upon the reply given by the Central Board of Customs and Excise to National Building Construction Corporation Limited (NBCC), vide Letter No. F. No. 332/16/2010-TRU., dated 24-5-2010, in support of this contention. On the other hand, learned DR submits that it is not correct to say that service has been provided to Govt. of India directly. He submits that the land is owned by Income Tax department and Income Tax department has requested the CPWD to construct the quarters for them and funds have been made available to CPWD by Ministry of Finance for this purpose. CPWD in reality has acted as a bridge between Income tax department and the contractor and after the residential complex is constructed, the same was handed over by CPWD to Income tax department a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties, there would be an agreement. Absence of any agreement between CPWD and Income tax department also supports the case of the learned advocate. Further, since on behalf of the President of India contractors are entered into, agreements are entered into and bonds are accepted, Govt. of India is treated as "Person". Therefore, we are unable to agree with the learned Commissioner when he says that the exclusion clause in the definition cannot be applied to the Govt. of India. For ready reference, definition of Construction of Complex Services is reproduced :- (a) Construction of a new residential complex or a part thereof; or (b) Completion and finishing services in relation to residential complex such as glazing, plastering, painting, floor and wall tiling, wall covering and wall preparing, wood and metal joinery and carpentry, fencing and railing, construction of swimming pools, acoustic applications or fittings and other similar services; or (c) Repair, alteration, renovation or restoration of, or similar services in relation to, residential complex] The definition of residential complex service has been given under clause (91a) of Section 65 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted as part of the Govt. of India and therefore, services provide by him would not be liable to service tax. Further, as submitted by the appellant in his submission, the agreement also provides that in case of liability of any tax, the service receiver is liable to pay. In these circumstances, the appellants had no reason to resort to suppression or mis-declaration of the facts to avoid payment of service tax since if the service tax was liable, as per the contract, CPWD was liable to pay service tax. Under these circumstances, invocation of extended time limit cannot be justified in this case. Therefore, penalties imposed under various sections of Finance Act, 1994 also cannot be upheld. 4. Another alternative submission made by the learned advocate was that the contract between the appellant and the CPWD was a works contract and VAT has been paid treating the same as works contract and therefore, no service tax was liable to be paid for the period prior to 1-6-2007. He has cited several decisions in support of this contention. However, we find that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Cemex Engineers v. Commissioner of Service Tax Cochin - 2010 (17) S.T.R. 534 (T....