Case Details: Aliens Group Infra Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pr. Commissioner of Central Tax, Rangareddy - GST, Hyderabad (2026) 39 Centax 148 (Tri.-Hyd)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- S/Shri Angad Prasad, Member (J) & A.K. Jyotishi, Member (T)
- Shri Lakshman Kumar, CA, for the Appellant.
- Shri K. Raji Reddy, AR, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The appellant sold an undivided share of land along with semi-constructed flats on which stamp duty was paid. As provided in the sale agreement, separate construction or completion agreements were entered into with each buyer for finishing the flats. A show cause notice (SCN) and order-in-original (OIO) confirmed demand under the construction of residential complexes service (CRCS) for the period April 2008 to March 2012, treating the activity as composite in nature. The appellant asserted that the activity was properly classifiable under works contract service with effect from 01-06-2007. It was contended that classification under CRCS was unsustainable. It was further contended that the construction undertaken for different individuals was for personal use and fell within the exclusion under the definition of residential complex. The matter was accordingly placed before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).
CESTAT Held
The CESTAT held that disputes on classification and leviability existed during the relevant period in light of Board clarifications issued in 2009 and 2012. It held that the activity beyond 01-07-2010 fell under works contract service and not under CRCS. It further held that an SCN issued under an incorrect classification could not be sustained in law. The Tribunal also held that the appellant had established that the construction was in relation to the personal use of individuals. Accordingly, it was held that the levy of service tax did not arise.
List of Cases Cited
- Alpine Estates v. Commissioner — Final Order No. A/30359/2023, dated 18-9-2023 CESTAT Hyderabad — Referred [Para 6]
- Commissioner v. CSK Realtors Ltd 2024 (3) TMI 351 — Followed [Paras 4, 11]
- Commissioner v. Motor World — 2012 (27) S.T.R. 225 (Kar.) — Referred [Para 6]
- Commissioner v. Pragathi Edifice Pvt Ltd — 2019 (31) G.S.T.L. 241 (Tri.-Hyd) — Followed [Paras 3, 9]
- Greewood Estates v. CCT — 2024 (3) TMI 563 — Followed [Paras 4, 11]
- ICC Reality & Others v. CCE — 2013 (32) S.T.R. 427 (Tri.-Bom) — Referred [Para 5]
- IVRCL Assets and Holdings Ltd v. Commissioner — 2021 (52) G.S.T.L. 304 (Tri. – Hyd.) — Followed [Paras 4, 11]
- Karnataka Trade Promotion Organisation v. CST — 2016-TIOL-1783-Tri.-Bang. — Referred [Para 6]
- Kolla Developers & Builders v. CCE — 2018 (11) TMI 164 — Followed [Paras 3, 9]
- Krishna Homs v. Commissioner — 2014 (34) S.T.R. 881 (Tri.-Del) — Followed [Paras 3, 9]
- Mehta & Modi Homes v. CCT — 2019 (2) TMI 476 — Followed [Paras 3, 9]
- Modi & Modi Constructions v. Commissioner — 2021 (45) G.S.T.L. 398 (Tri.-Hyd) — Followed [Paras 4, 11]
- Modi Ventures v. CCT — 2020 (3) TMI 1481 — Followed [Paras 3, 9, 11]
List of Departmental Clarification Cited
- C.B.E. & C Circular No.108/2/2009-ST, dated 29-1-2009 [Paras 2, 10]
- C.B.E. & C Circular No.151/2/2012-ST, dated 10-2-2012 [Paras 4, 10]
