Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 241 - AT - Service TaxCleaning services to Child Trust Hospital - CBEC circular in F. No. B1/6/2005-TRU dated 27.7.2005 - Held that:- In the present case, the assessee has produced documents to show that the said hospital been given approval under section 80G(5)(iv) of the Income Tax Act for deduction in donations made to Kanchi Kamakoti Child Trust Hospital. The department merely alleges that the hospital is receiving fees and therefore cannot be considered as non-commercial hospital. No evidence is put forth by the department that the hospital has collected expenses / fees from patients for treatment. If a hospital merely collects registration fees for registration of the patient and does not collect expenses for treatment, it cannot be said that the said hospital would fall out of the category of non-commercial building / hospital. The department having failed to establish with evidence, that Child Trust Hospital is a commercial building, the conclusion arrived by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the said hospital is a non-commercial hospital and the services rendered by the assessee to the hospital would not come within the purview of service tax requires no interference. Imposition of penalty - outdoor caterings service - extended period of limitation - Held that:- Apart from alleging that the assessee did not disclose the service tax payable under cleaning service, there is no allegation of suppression of facts on the part of the assessee. The cleaning services are not subject to levy of service tax - the conclusion of the Commissioner (Appeals) that demand for the extended period cannot sustain requires no interference, the penalty has been rightly set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals). Outdoor catering service - demand of service tax - Held that:- Appellant have availed credit on various input services like telephone, courier, security which are used for providing outdoor catering service. On such score, it is very much clear that there is violation of the condition of the notification. Therefore, the assessee cannot take the benefit of notification. The demand confirmed by Commissioner (Appeals) for the normal period on outdoor catering service is legal and proper. Resultantly, the impugned order does not call for any interference. Appeal disposed off.
|