News Update

GST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCGST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesI-T- Secured creditor has priority charge over secured asset, over claims of I-T Department & other Departments; any excess amount recovered by Secured Creditor from auction of secured asset, over & above the dues payable to it, are to be remitted to the Departments: HCFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesI-T - Once assssee on year of reversal has paid taxes on excess provision and similar feature appeared in earlier years and assesee had payments for liquidated damages on delay of deliverables, no adverse inference can be drawn: HCFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerST - Software development service & IT-enabled service provided by assessee was exempt from tax during relevant period, by virtue of CBEC's Notification & Circular; demands raised for such period not sustainable: CESTATUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayCus - Order rejecting exporter's request for conversion of Shipping Bills on grounds that the same has been made by exporter beyond period of three months from date of Let Export Order in terms of CBEC Circular No. 36/2010-Cus : CESTATIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEACus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTATThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCX - As per settled law, a right acquired as result of a statutory provision, cannot be taken away retrospectively unless said statutory provision so provides or by necessary implication has such effect: CESTAT
 
ST - Once activity undertaken of supply of food to its workers at subsidized rate is understood to be part of Petitioner’s industrial obligation, it is unthinkable that same can be construed as service: HC

By TIOL News Service

HYDERABAD, APRIL 22, 2017: THE petitioner is a hotel engaged both in the business of boarding and lodging. The petitioner also has a restaurant.

The present dispute is confined only to the value of the food supplied by the petitioner to the workers employed by them.

By the impugned o-in-o, the Revenue authorities came to the conclusion that the food supplied by the management of the petitioner to its own workers at a subsidized rate, tantamount to a service, taxable under Section 67 of the Act, in view of the fact that the food is supplied in an area outside the registered premises.

The petitioner is before the High Court in a Writ Petition.

The High Court observed that the question that arises for its consideration is as to whether the food supplied by an employer to the workers at a subsidized rate, would come within the meaning of the expression 'service', irrespective of whether the food is supplied within the premises or outside the premises.

After extracting the definition of the word "service" appearing in section 65B(44) of the FA, 1994, the High Court noted -

+ To come within the purview of the definition of the expression 'service', the following pre-requisites are to be found:

(i) there should be an activity,

(ii) such activity should be carried out by a person for another, and

(iii) it should be carried out for a consideration.

+ The stand taken by the respondents is that after the amended definition of the expression 'service', all types of services come within the purview of the tax net, except those that are exempted under the Notification 25/2012-ST, dated 20.06.2012.

+ But, what has been omitted to be taken note of, is the fact that unless an activity carried on by a person falls within the purview of the definition 'service', the question of analyzing whether such activity falls within the exemption under the Notification, dated 20.06.2012, does not arise. Therefore, primarily, one has to satisfy oneself as to whether the activity in question satisfies all the ingredients of service within the definition of the term under Section 65B(44).

+ Naturally, no management will be magnanimous enough to ask the workers to take the food sitting inside the air-conditioned dining hall. If the workers are provided food outside such a restaurant, which is meant exclusively for feeding them, the same cannot be treated as not forming part of the establishment. To say that the establishment feeds its own workers, but to conclude that the place where it is provided is not part of the establishment, tantamounts to creating a dichotomy, which does not exist.

+ As a matter of fact, any supply of subsidized food to the workers by the management of a Company, has to be seen as part of the pay package that the workers have negotiated with the employer. Under the Factories Act, 1948 and even under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the expression 'wages' would include within its purview, anything that is supplied at a subsidized rate.

+ Section 2(rr) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines 'wages' to mean, all remuneration capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled, be payable to a workman in respect of his employment.

+ Therefore, the food supplied by an employer to its employees at a subsidized rate forms part of the wages under Section 2(rr) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

+ Once the activity undertaken by the petitioner in the form of supply of food to its workers at a subsidized rate is understood to be part of their industrial obligation, it is unthinkable that the same can be construed as service falling within the definition of the expression 'service' under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act.

+ As a matter of fact, the petitioner has paid the value added tax on the value of the food supplied to its workers. In respect of some assessment years, they have even been imposed with a penalty under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. Therefore, once the State Authorities have treated the supply of food to the workers of the petitioner as sale, it is not open to the respondents to treat the same as service and impose a liability.

Holding that the respondent Revenue had completely overlooked this aspect and assumed a jurisdiction not vested in him in law, the impugned order was set aside and the Writ Petition was allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-779-HC-AP-ST)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023