Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

February 2015

[2015-TIOL-108-CESTAT-MUM] – Matunga Gymkhana, Tahnee Heights Co-op . Hou. Soc. Ltd, Mittal Tower Premises Co-operative Society vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Mandar telang Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Services to members of club/co-operative housing society is not a service by one to another and is not liable for service tax.

Facts:
The demand of service tax in all these cases is based on the premise that the Appellants are providing “Club & Association” service.

Held:
Relying on the judgments of Ranchi Club vs. Chief Commr. Of C. Ex. & ST, Ranchi 2012 (26) STR 401(Jhar), Sports Club of Gujarat vs. Union of India-2013-TIOL-528- HC-AHM-ST and M/s. Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi-2014-TIOL-701-CESTAT-DEL701-CESTAT-DEL, where it was held that in view of mutuality and activities of the club there is no service by one to another and thus the levy of service tax is ultra vires, the appeals were allowed.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

[2014]-TIOL-2388-CESTAT-AHM Venketeshwar Filaments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE & ST, Vapi.

2015-TIOL-142-CESTAT-MUM Bombay Paints Ltd vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai- II