Service Tax – Cestat Ahmedabad: Service tax is not payable on amount received by Appellant as it was merely towards sharing of consideration towards service – Appeal allowed [Order attached]
Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
15-Jan-2023 13:41:02
Order Date – 12 January 2023
Parties: Shree Jain Vish Oshwal Club Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax - Ahmedabad
Facts –
- The Appellant, Shree Jain Vish Oshwal Club is registered trust carrying out various social and charitable services. The Appellant has been giving its property for temporary rent to generate income to boost its charitable activities. The appellant given the property on temporary basis to M/s Gandhi Associates for providing other related service to such parties taking hall on hire basis.
- The case of the department is that the share received by the appellant from contractor is liable to Service Tax under Business Auxiliary Service.
Issue –
- Whether the Service Tax is payable on mere sharing of consideration towards service?
Order –
- The Tribunal held that it will not prima facie amount to provision of any service on the part of the appellant. The appellant had a bona fide belief in non payment of Service Tax. The appellant also submitted that this case is falling under the principle of revenue neutrality in as much as the tax payment if any made by the appellant is available as the Cenvat credit to the contractor who has used the premises of the appellant.
- In view of this fact, the suppression of fact and mala fide cannot be attributed against the appellant. Accordingly, the demand is hit by limitation as extended period could not have been invoked in the fact of the present case.
- Hence the appeal is allowed.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation