TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1165
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een imposed on the appellant under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and a penalty of Rs.10,000/- has also been imposed under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a Private limited registered with the Service Tax Authorities vide registration no. AAACU3845QST001 for provision of "Management, maintenance or repair service" and "Renting of Immovable Property". 2.1 Pursuant to an Indenture of Conveyance dated 24-12-2002 executed between the President of India and the Appellant, the Appellant acquired a commercial property at 21, Hemant Basu Sarani, Kolkata - 700001. The property comprised of multiple units, majority of which were sold and others rented out. The Appellant also und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....benefit of Notification No.12/2003-Service tax dated 01-07-2003. Being aggrieved with the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The ld.Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that in respect of "Electricity charges" relating to Service tax Rs.74,56,869/, it is submitted that electricity constitutes "goods" and is specifically covered under Schedule A to the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act. Under the erstwhile positive list regime, Notification No.12/2003-ST provided for exclusion of the value of goods from the taxable value and, accordingly, no service tax is leviable thereon. In the present case, the Appellant has raised separate invoices for electricity charges, which has been expressly acknowledged in the im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rats Pvt. Ltd. vs UOI [2013 (29) STR 9 (Del.) - affirmed in 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC)]. 3.4 It is also submitted that a substantial portion of the demand is barred by limitation, save and except demand of Rs.16,51,842/- for the FY 2011-12. The invocation of the extended period is unsustainable as the issue involved is purely interpretational. It is settled law that in matters involving interpretation of statutory provisions, the extended period cannot be invoked. Reliance in this regard is placed on Commissioner vs Reliance Industries [2023 (3) TMI 196 - SC]. In the present case, while the Department seeks to levy service tax on the transactions in question, the issue stood covered in favour of the Appellant as early as 2013 in ICC Realty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utually agreed by and between the Consumer and the occupiers." Significantly, the seventh proviso to Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003 expressly recognises and permits distribution of electricity by a distribution licensee through another person within its area of supply without any requirement of obtaining separate license. Therefore, the very factual basis on which the Hon'ble High Court proceeded in Srijan Realty stands absent in the present matter. (iii) Importantly, even in Srijan Realty, the Hon'ble High Court expressly acknowledged that electricity is "goods" and is capable of being traded. Furthermore, the Hon'ble High Court was not considering the applicability of Exemption Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... here that the respondents are supplying electricity to their tenants, so whether the supply of electricity is "goods" or not ? 7. The said issue has been examined by the by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Kumbakonam Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. Versus Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Esplanade Division Madras - 1963 (9) TMI 43 - Madras High Court, which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, Indore Vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, Jabalpur (supra), wherein electricity has been held as goods. Same view has been taken again by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of AP & Others versus National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. And Others (supra), w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a distributor under the fact that the Electricity Department provided them with one common meter for the whole building, intrusting upon the appellant to give connection through sub meters to its tenant (s) and thereafter, they collected the amount and paid to the Electricity Department. Thus, the activity is also in the nature of pure agent, being done by the appellant. Accordingly, we hold that the appellant is not liable to pay service tax on the sale of electricity either received from the Electricity Department or supplied from its D.G. Sets and also regarding sale of other consumer goods to the tenants." 11. Admittedly, in this case, the respondent has supplied electricity to their tenants against payment. Therefore, the same....