Disposed

Lalitha Bloom Field Home Owners Asso. Hyderabad v. Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad and 1 Other

Telangana HC28 Aug 2017WP/28697/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition by a gated community association challenging a show-cause notice for service tax. The court reserved judgment on the tax liability but directed the respondents to pass orders within eight weeks considering the petitioner's objections.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to take note of petitioner's objections and pass orders within eight weeks of receipt of the order.

Lalitha Bloom Field Home Owners Asso. Hyderabad Vs… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN

¶2

AND

¶3

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. RAJANI

¶4

WRIT PETITION No.28697 of 2017

¶5

ORDER: (Per VRS,J)

¶6

The petitioner, which is an association of owners of villas in a gated community, has come up with the above writ petition, challenging a show-cause-notice issued by the 1^st respondent demanding service tax.

¶7

Heard Mr. S. Ravindranath, learned counsel for the petitioner. The Assistant Solicitor General takes notice for the respondents.

¶8

The impugned show-cause-notice is dated 19.04.2016. The petitioner has already submitted its reply on 09.05.2016. So far, no orders have been passed.

¶9

It appears from the show-cause-notice that the petitioner was registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, for the maintenance and development of 45 villas in a gated community. The members of the petitioner association are the owners of these villas. In every apartment complex or in every gated community, associations of owners or residents are formed for the purpose of taking care of common maintenance. It is actually a service rendered by the owners to themselves. The same cannot be construed as a

¶10

2 VRS,J & TR,J

¶11

WP No.28697 of 2017

¶12

service rendered by an entity to a third party. Therefore, we do not know how service tax liability gets attracted in such cases.

¶13

However, dehors our reservation about the demand made by the respondents in the show-cause-notice, we deem it fit to direct the respondents to take note of the objections of the petitioner, dated 09.05.2016, to the show-cause-notice and pass orders in accordance with law, taking note of the objections we have made. The respondents shall pass orders within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶14

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any pending in the

¶15

writ petition shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶16

__________________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J

¶17

____________ T. RAJANI, J. 28^th August, 2017 cbs

¶18

3 VRS,J & TR,J

¶19

WP No.28697 of 2017

¶20

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN 

¶21

AND

¶22

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. RAJANI

¶23

Writ Petition No.28697 of 2017

¶24

(disposed of)

¶25

28^th August, 2017

¶26

WP No.28697 of 2017

¶27

cbs

¶28

4 VRS,J & TR,J

Lalitha Bloom Field Home Owners Asso. Hyderabad v. Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad and 1 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalitha Bloom Field Home Owners Asso. Hyderabad v. Additional Commissioner, Hyderabad and 1 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s R.K.Mining Private Limited Vs M/s Obulapuram Mining Company Limited

Ch.Venkateswarlu Vs M/s Shram City Union Finance Limited,Nellore

Rakhee Agarwal Vs Dr. William Trevor Lunt