Case Law Details
Case Name : Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise Vs M/s. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. (Madras High Court)
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
All High Courts Madras High Court
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise Vs M/s. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. (Madras High Court)
It is seen from the contract that the appellants prepared engineering designs required for executing the project simultaneously with carrying out the construction work involved in the execution of the project. We find that in the Daelim Industrial Company Ltd. (supra) cited by the appellants, the Apex Court had upheld the decision of the Tribunal. The Tribunal had held that a turnkey contract could not be vivisected and the service portion separately taxed.
The agreement involved HCCL u...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
OFFHAND
In the instant case, in terms of the contract agreements, admittedly, the contractor had agreed to provide ‘engineering services’, per se in the nature of ‘services’. Even then, accepting the several arguments of the assessed, – mainly that it is an indivisible, composite and turn-key contract, – the HC has, after considering the plethora of decided cases, has decided the issue against the Revenue. If so, the levy of ST /GST, in terms of a ‘sale’ of units in a building (Flat/apartments), after its completion of construction, in terms of which the promoter /seller has not agreed, specifically or implicitly, to render any ‘services’ (or to supply any goods), it could be urged not at all sustainable.