TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1220
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tuted by the Government of Orissa under Orissa Housing Board Act, 1968. They undertook the work allotted by them to the Government of Orissa towards the Housing schemes announced by the Government. Towards this, they undertake various activities like taking up advertisement & publicity work, sale of application form, sale of Tender Paper, etc. For all these, they get paid by the State Govt or the receiver of the service. The Revenue has taken all these as part of consideration received by them as Real Estate Agent. 3. The Learned Authorized Representative submits that major portion of the consideration is on account of sale of Application Form which cannot be treated as any service at all. Further, he takes the stand that the appellant is performing sovereign function for the Government of Orissa. He submits that as per the list under Section 66(d) any Service rendered by the government is fully exempted from payment of Service Tax. In this case, the appellants are part of Government of Orissa. All the documentary evidence to this effect has been submitted along with the appeal papers. Therefore, no Service Tax is required to be paid by them. 4. He also relies on the case law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt; (ii) inter se sale or purchase of foreign currency amongst banks or authorised dealers of foreign exchange or amongst banks and such dealers;" 18. Further, it is observed that the ASC charges transferred to ASC fund and hire-purchase deposit is apparently not an income of the appellant. These receipts are either refundable or adjustable at a future date since the same could not have been done during the period in question that they were shown as liability in the balance sheet of the appellant. The balance sheet on record when seen with other documents on record makes it clear that the findings in para 5.15 are against the facts of the case and against the said documentary evidence. It is nowhere denied that the said deposits are being used by the appellant for the construction of Government Primary School, Dispensary, Police Chowki, Fire Station etc. as are required for the overall development of public facilities in the township as created by the appellant. 19. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the appellant is neither such a body corporate as is required for Section 65(12) of Finance Act, 1994 nor the funds as that of ASC charges and hir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dd that MIDC was required to incur huge expenditure on litigation. All this could have been avoided by the Appellant. 11. On a similar issue, in the case of Karnataka Industrial Areas Dev. Board Vs. Commr. of Central Tax, Bangalore North-2020 (40) G.S.T.L. 33 (Tri. - Bang.), the Bangalore Tribunal has held as under:- 7.3 The issue whether the statutory authority performing statutory functions as provided under a statute is liable to service tax or not has been considered and decided by catena of judgments rendered by various Courts. In the case of Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) cited supra, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that no service tax could be demanded on the charges collected by the MIDC, in terms of MID Act, 1961 towards maintenance of industrial areas as the same is in the nature of statutory function performed in terms of the statute. It is pertinent to quote the relevant findings of the Bombay High Court, in paras 5, 6, 7 :- 5. We have given careful consideration to the submissions. Firstly, it will be necessary to note what is set out in the circular dated 18th December, 2006 bearing No. 89/7/2006. Clause....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ittedly paying Service Tax. Further the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held in MIDC case as under:- 11. The Apex Court categorically held that functions and powers of MIDC indicate that the said Corporation is acting as a wing of the Government. In the case of Managing Director, Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation, the Apex Court was considering the role played by Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation. The Apex Court held that the said Corporation discharges sovereign functions. The Apex Court also held that considering the objects and purport for which the said Corporation of Haryana has been constituted, the function discharged by the Corporation must be held as Governmental function. 14. MIDC is a statutory Corporation which is virtually a wing of the State Government. It discharges several sovereign functions. In our view, the Revenue ought not to have compelled MIDC to prefer Appeals before Appellate Tribunal. Not only that MIDC was driven to prefer Appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, these groups of Appeals were preferred by the Revenue. Needless to add that MIDC was required to incur huge expenditure on litigation. All thi....