Case Law Details
Safal Construction Pvt Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that services provided by an active party to the joint venture is not covered within Business Support Service. Work was assigned on the basis of co-developer and not an agent. Accordingly, service tax not payable.
Facts-
The issue in the present appeal is that the appellant have not paid service tax in relation to the joint development under the agreement. The case of the department is that in terms of agreement, the appellant carried out a limited activity of marketing and liasoning for the project with the government departments and follow-up with sanctioning authorities and obtaining all licenses, approvals, permissions, consents, no objection certificates etc. for implementing the Pegasus Commercial Complex. On this basis, the contention of the Revenue is that the appellant has provided Business Support Service to the joint developer therefore, they are liable to pay service tax under the category of “Support Service for Business and Commerce‟ as defined under the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, show cause notice was issued demanding service tax, interest thereon and proposing penalties. The said show cause notice was adjudicated by the learned Commissioner of Service Tax Ahmedabad whereby the service tax demand, interest and penalties as proposed in the show cause notice were confirmed. Being aggrieved by the said order-in-original the appellant filed the present appeal.
Conclusion-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
