VITP Private Limited v Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad)
The CESTAT, Hyderabad in the matter of M/s. VITP Private Limited v Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad [Final Order No: A/30070-30073/2022 dated July 8, 2022] set aside the demand of service tax on refundable security deposit on the grounds that security deposit is refundable deposit and it cannot be included in the value of taxable service. Further, when there was no services rendered by the assessee towards the termination charges, the demand of termination charge cannot be sustained. Furthermore held that, assessee is entitled to the Cenvat Credit of input services for construction of immovable property, further let out to various customers.
Facts:
M/s. VITP Private Limited (“the Appellant”) has been engaged in the business of development of IT Parks and such other industrial and commercial places which are subsequently given on rent to a wide spectrum of industries. Service tax audit was conducted by the Superintendent, (“the Respondent”) and accordingly, Show Cause Notices were issued for four periods between 2007 to 2013. Disputes has been arrived and all the four appeals pertaining to the period of June 2007 to June 2013 are disposed off by a common order.
A table has been reproduced below which shows the demand raised for the relevant period in each appeal.
