Case Law Details
Prajapita Brahma Kumaris Ishwariya Vishwa Vidyalaya Vs Commissioner Of CGST & CE (CESTAT Mumbai)
The only objection which has been raised is to the word ‘building’ used in the Notification No 25/2012-ST whereas appellant are claiming exemption in respect of shop and flats purchased by them from the M/s Yog Reality. In the impugned order and during the course of arguments learned authorized representative has sought to distinguish the decisions of Asha Murarka & Others {Manu/WB/0282/2015 and in the case of Notified Area Committee Nangal Township [MANU/SC/0991/1999 from the facts of following case and have argued that as per this decision a flat in a building should be construed as separate unit. A flat is in building. Multi storey buildings are divided into flats or units.
In the case of Notified Area Committee Nangal Township [AIR 1999 SC 2569] Hon’ble Apex Court has held as follows:
“We do not think that the Committee is right in its approach. If we may refer to the definition of the ‘building’, it means any house used for the purpose of human habilitation. The term ‘house’ in the present case would mean a dwelling house intended for human habilitation. It is not disputed that each quarter or bungalow is allotted to a separate employee who lives therein with his family. Simply because some quarters or some bungalows have common wall separating each other would not mean that that quarter or bungalow ceases to be a house. A house is a place of dwelling or habilitation. It is difficult to accept the proposition that quarters in one row having common wall though each separating the other would mean one building for the purpose of arriving at the annual value. We do not think that any argument is needed for us to hold that each such quarter or bungalow for the residence of employees of the Board would fall within the definition of ‘building’. Stand of the Committee appears to us is rather incongruous. Just to get more revenue, the Committee could not change its stand and put interpretation on the term ‘building’ which is incomprehensible. The Committee was not justified in clubbing all the quarters/bungalows in one block together and term that as ‘building’.”
After taking note of this decision, Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan has in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation [RLW 2008 (1) Raj 439] held as follows:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
