Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Brahma Developers vs Cce, Tirunelveli on 13 June, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
ST/41466/2013
(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 8/ST/COMMR/2013 dated 27.3.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli)
M/s. Brahma Developers Appellant
Vs.
CCE, Tirunelveli Respondent
Appearance Shri S. Venkatachalam, Advocate for the Appellant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent CORAM Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member Honble Shri B. Ravichandran, Technical Member Date of Hearing / Decision: 13.06.2016 Final Order No. 40941 / 2016 Per D.N. Panda Appellant constructed a residential complex for the use of Government of India entering into a contract with CPWD on behalf of the President of India. The service provided is sought to be taxed under section 65(105)(zzzh) of Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65(30A) and 65(91A) of the said Act. Appellant says that Tribunal has already taken a view that any construction made for the Government of India not being for commercial use or personal use that shall not make the appellant liable to service tax. He cites the following decisions of the Tribunal in this regard:-
(a) Khurana Engineering Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad 2011 (21) STR 115 (Tri. Ahmd.)
(b) Singhania Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur 2015 (37) STR 551 (Tri. Del.)
(c) P.B. Rathod Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik 2015 (39) STR 650 (Tri. Mumbai)
2. Revenue on the other hand says that the constructed building being used for the employees of the BSF that shall not be treated as for personal use.
3. Heard both sides and perused the records.
4. There is no dispute that the construction was made on behalf of the President of India which was not a commercial property. That was not even made for identified person for his personal use. That was made residential complex of the BSF and not being constructed for commercial use but meant for the use of the Government of India that is out of the scope of taxation under the Finance Act, 1994. This view has been repeatedly taken in the decisions cited above by the appellant. Therefore, without dilating the matter further, following judicial discipline, the appeal is allowed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(B. RAVICHANDRAN) (D.N. PANDA)
Technical Member Judicial Member
Rex
2