2013 (10) TMI 297 - AT - Service Tax

Renting of Immovable Property Services - Joint property / co-ownership - benefit of SSI exemption Notification No 6/2005-ST - whether each owner is eligible for value based exemption - Held that - the aggregate value of the taxable services rendered should be considered for the purpose of exemption and in the present case if individually all the appellants be considered as provider of such service, their aggregate value does not exceed the threshold limit. - Following Pankajbhai Champaklal Parekh Vs. Commar. Of S.T. Ahmedabad 2012 (11) TMI 252 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD Stay granted.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Service tax liability on the appellant for 'Renting of immovable property services'
- Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 6/2005-ST

Analysis:

1. Service tax liability on the appellant for 'Renting of immovable property services': The appellant, as one of the owners of premises rented out to M/s. UDG Ventures, was under scrutiny for service tax liability. The Revenue argued that all owners should be considered an association of persons liable for service tax. However, the appellant contended that being an individual who received separate payments for the property rented out, he was eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2005-ST. The Tribunal noted similar cases where unconditional waivers were granted based on individual eligibility for the exemption. Citing past precedents, the Tribunal found no difference in the facts of the current case and granted a prima facie strong case for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved. Consequently, the application for waiver was allowed, and recovery stayed pending appeal disposal.

2. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 6/2005-ST: The crux of the issue revolved around the appellant's claim to exemption under Notification No. 6/2005-ST as an individual owner receiving separate payments for the rented property. The Tribunal, drawing parallels with previous cases, emphasized the individual's right to avail the benefit of the said notification. By aligning the facts of the current case with past judgments, the Tribunal reinforced the appellant's entitlement to the exemption, thus warranting a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay on recovery pending appeal resolution.

This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the Tribunal's consideration of the appellant's individual status, the nature of the rented property services, and the applicability of the exemption notification in determining the service tax liability and subsequent waiver of pre-deposit.