No service tax can be levied on food served as take away or parcels

Last updated: 07 June 2021
Quick Summary
The Madras High Court has ruled that service tax cannot be levied on food served as takeaway parcels. The court determined that providing food for takeaway is essentially a sale of goods, not a service attracting tax under the Finance Act. This decision clarifies that the specific services associated with dining in, such as seating and table service, are absent in takeaway transactions.

Court :
Madras High Court

Brief :
The Hon’ble Madras High Court ('HC') in Anjappar Chettinad A/C Restaurants v. Joint Commissioner [W.P. Nos. 13469 of 2020, 28789 & 28095 of 2019 and 1748 & 5935 of 2021 decided on May 20, 2021] held that provision of food and drink to be taken-away in parcels by restaurant tantamount to the sale of food and drink and thus, shall not attract service tax under the Finance Act.

Citation :
W.P. Nos. 13469 of 2020, 28789 & 28095 of 2019 and 1748 & 5935 of 2021 decided on May 20, 2021

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. Typographical Error in the SCN Cannot Be a Shield for the Assessee Who Participated in the Proceedings Without Raising Any Objection
  2. Penalty on partners under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act upheld where complicity in fake invoicing and hawala-linked ITC fraud stands established
  3. Forest Development Tax Demand, Collection and Refund Subject to Final Outcome of Pending Cases
  4. SC : Extended Limitation Cannot Be Invoked Where Department Was Aware of Valuation Facts
  5. SC : Selling Shares While in Possession of UPSI Constitutes Insider Trading Even if No Profit Is Made
  6. SC : Laser Imagers Compatible with Machines Under Different Tariff Headings Classifiable Under CTH 9033
  7. Education Consultancy Services to Foreign Universities Not Intermediary Services; Refund of IGST on Export of Services Allowed
  8. Penalty Cannot Be Confirmed Beyond What is Specified in Statutory Form GST DRC-01
  9. Non-Supply of Field Visit Report Vitiates Rejection of Revocation Application
  10. Alternative Remedy before GSTAT to be Exhausted Despite Allegation that Adjudication Travelled Beyond SCN

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member Tanuj Kumar SharmaTanuj Kumar SharmaPro Member KOMAL BHAGWATKOMAL BHAGWATPro Member rajkumar yadavrajkumar yadavPro Member Vignesh PaiVignesh PaiPro Member Sharang Sanjay MangalekarSharang Sanjay Mangalekar
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category