Case Law Details
Shantanu Co Operative Housing Society Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
The adjudicating authority precisely held that the cooperative society of the Members have provided construction of complex service to its members and the same is liable for service tax. The appellant’s contention was that the service provided by the cooperative societies to its members being involved mutuality of interest, there is no relationship of service provider and service recipient between cooperative societies and its members therefore, the same is not liable to service tax.
Shri Rahul Patel, learned Chartered Accountant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that this issue is no longer under dispute as in the case of M/s. Shrinandnagar Co-op Housing Society Limited case, involving the identical facts, wherein the appellant deposited some amount of service tax for which they had claimed the refund. The said refund was rejected on merit however, this Tribunal vide Order No. A/1346-1361/WZB/AHD/2009 dated 03.07.2009 allowed the refund after considering the merits in detail. Against the said Tribunal’s order, Revenue had filed Tax Appeal No. 382 of 2010 before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat which was dismissed vide order dated 30.06.2011 on merit. Accordingly, the issue stand settled that the service between present Co-operative Housing Society to its members is not liable for service tax. With this legal position, the demand in the present case does not survive hence, the appeal be allowed.
In the present case, the issue to be decided by us is that whether the construction of Complex Service provided by the appellant is liable to service tax or otherwise. This issue is settled in the case of M/s. Shrinandnagar-iv Co-operative Housing Society Limited. This Tribunal vide order dated 30.07.2009 (supra) decided the matter on merit in the appellant’s favour holding that the appellant is eligible for refund.
With the above order of the Tribunal which was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court, the issue on merit that whether the service of construction of complex provided by the appellant’s Cooperative Housing Society to its members is liable to service tax or otherwise has been settled in favour of the appellant. It was informed by the learned counsel that the Hon’ble High Court’s judgment (supra) has been accepted by the revenue.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
