2025 (6) TMI 1357 - AT - Service Tax

Taxability - transfer fees and miscellaneous charges which include floating and other administration charges which were levied by the GIDC on the plot-holders who were their clients and holders of plots in their industrial estate - HELD THAT - The matter stands covered now by the decision in their own matter by this Tribunal s Bench (different Constitution) in GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ST AHMEDABAD-III 2024 (9) TMI 1359 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD . He has drawn the attention to the para-7 while following the decision of MIDC in COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE NASHIK VERSUS MAHARASHTRA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2018 (2) TMI 1498 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT . The matter is no more res-integra and stands decided in their own case by this Tribunal s Bench (different Constitution) and same stands accepted even on merits and para-7 cited convinces that for the charges of the similar nature the benefit was given to GIDC who is considered to be government also. Conclusion - The fees are necessary for maintenance management and repairs of the industrial estate and are not subject to service tax. The appeal is allowed.

Summary

The Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT Ahmedabad) addressed the taxability of transfer fees and miscellaneous charges, including floating and administration charges levied by the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) on plot-holders in its industrial estate. The Tribunal relied on its prior decision reported in 2024 (9) TMI 1359, which followed the precedent set by MIDC in 2018 (2) TMI 1498, holding that such fees are statutory levies under the Gujarat Industrial Development Act, 1962, and thus "are not subject to service tax during the impugned period of either before or after 01.07.2012."Crucially, the Tribunal emphasized that no service tax applies to the "infrastructure up-gradation fund" (IUF) collected on behalf of Industrial Associations, as these do not constitute consideration for any service provided by GIDC. The Revenue accepted this position on merit, as evidenced by a letter dated 18.02.2025, and did not oppose the appeal substantively.The Tribunal concluded that the issue was no longer res-integra, reaffirming the earlier ruling and allowing the appeal. The key holding states: fees "are necessary for maintenance, management and repairs of the industrial estate... and are not subject to service tax," and accordingly, the appeal was allowed.