9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Service Tax demand on "renting of immovable property" service and "port service" provided by the appellant.
Summary: Issue 1: Service Tax demand on "renting of immovable property" service The appellant, a Port Officer, appealed against an adjudication order confirming a Service Tax demand for providing "renting of immovable property" service during a specific period. The show cause notice alleged receipt of amounts from various entities for renting immovable property. The appellant argued that it does not own any property and only provides core port services, collecting payments on behalf of entities and remitting them to the State Govt. without retaining any amounts. The Court noted that the proceedings did not address whether the appellant had any control over immovable property or entered into lease agreements. It concluded that the finding that the appellant provided renting of immovable property service without critical examination of relevant facts was questionable. Issue 2: Service Tax demand on "port service" The adjudication order also confirmed a demand for providing "port service" during a specified period. The appellant contended that it did not provide any taxable service as it did not own any property and only facilitated payments to the State Govt. The Court found that there was no evidence of the appellant having any transferable interest in immovable property leased to third parties. It held that the conclusion that the appellant provided port service was not adequately supported by critical examination of facts. Conclusion: The Court granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of proceedings for recovery of the assessed liability, noting that the appellant had made a strong prima facie case for relief due to the lack of critical examination of relevant facts in determining the Service Tax liability for renting of immovable property and port services provided.
|
