2024 (8) TMI 400

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ocation Charges[PLC] " charges received by them for the period 2010-11 to 2014-15 and service tax has been demanded on that.  Year IFMS Charges Rate of S. Tax S. Tax Payable 2010-11 Nil 10.3% Nil 2011-12 Rs.2112822/- 10.3% Rs.217621/- 2012-13 2013-14 Rs.6960900/- Rs. 1265328/- 12.36% 12.36% Rs.860368/- Rs.156395/- 2014-15 Rs.3820063/- 12.36% Rs.472160/- TOTAL Rs.14159113/-   Rs.17,06,544/-   Sr. No Period PLC Received Service tax paid (after abatement) Service tax Payable (without abatement) Differential Service tax Payable 1 2010-11 NIL NIL NIL NIL 2 April 2011 to Sep. 11 NIL NIL ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and eighteen only) upon M/s Vipul IT Infrasoft Pvt. Ltd; A-4, Logix Technova, Sector-132, Noida, under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The aforesaid amounts should be paid forthwith.   3. Being aggrieved the Appellant filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority which upheld the Order-In-Original and rejected the appeal before him. Hence, the present appeal before the Tribunal.   4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records.  5. We find that the issue in the present appeal regarding the IFMS is no more res-integra and has been decided consistently by the Tribunal. The Appellant is collecting charges from their customers under the category of IFMS. Revenue entertained a view that such ch....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the purpose of providing any services, so as to levy tax on the same. 7. In any case, we also note that the issue stands decided by precedent decisions of the Tribunal. Reference can be made to the Tribunal's decision in the case of CCE & ST, Jaipur vs. Sand Dunes Construction Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (7) TMI-1383-CESTAT-New Delhi, whereby while taking note of the precedent decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kumar Beheray Rathi vs. CCE, Pune 2013 (12) TMI-269-CESTAT Mumbai, it was held that the security deposits collected by the Builder for providing maintenance to immovable property services would not be taxable under the category of 'Management Maintenance or Repairs Services'. Prime/Preferential Location Charges (PLC) 8. It is subm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x service. As such PLC are charged by the Appellant during the construction of the building and are therefore, naturally bundled with the service of construction of building. 11. In view of the above submissions, if the PLC charges collected by the Appellant shall be liable to service tax, then as per the aforementioned facts, the same is naturally bundled with the service of construction and as such the Appellant has rightly claimed abatement in lieu of the same under S.No. 12 of Notification No 26/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 and has rightly deposited service tax on 25% value of the PLC charges collected. 12. That the Appellant has collected Preferential Location Charges from it's customers. PLC is nothing but an additional amount c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ervices. Section 66 F (1) provides that - unless otherwise specified, reference to a service (hereinafter referred to as main service) shall not include - reference to a service which is used for providing main service. Further, where a service is capable of differential treatment for any purposes based on its description, the most specific description shall be preferred over a general description. Further, sub section 3 provides - the taxability of a bundled service shall be determined, if various elements of such service are naturally bundled in the ordinary course of business, it shall be treated as provision of the single service, which give such bundle its essential character. Section 66F shall prevail over any clarification etc. given....