2023 (8) TMI 1039 - SC - Service Tax

Refund of service tax in relation to a rental transaction with the Mumbai International Airport Limited - Rejection on the ground that the payment of service tax on renting of immovable property of the duty free shops was not liable to be refunded in terms of the provisions of the Finance Act 1994 - HELD THAT - The review is allowed by recalling the judgment dated 10 April 2023 2023 (4) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT - appeal shall stand restored to the file of the Court. The Civil Appeal shall stand tagged with the above appeals. The Registry shall obtain administrative directions so that all the appeals can be clubbed together and be heard by one Bench expeditiously. The appeal having been restored to the file for final disposal, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken for the recovery of the dues, pending the disposal of the appeal.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves a review sought by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise regarding a refund of service tax in a rental transaction with Mumbai International Airport Limited.

Details of the Judgment:
1. The respondent, engaged in duty-free shop business at international airports, claimed a refund of service tax based on a government notification. The refund was initially rejected, but the CESTAT allowed the appeal for the refund.
2. The CESTAT concluded that the levy of service tax on duty-free shops at international airports lacked lawful authority, citing a previous decision of the Supreme Court.
3. The Union Government argued that the statutory regime for goods differs from that for services, highlighting pending appeals on similar issues before the Court.
4. The Supreme Court affirmed the CESTAT's judgment, referencing dismissals of related Special Leave Petitions.
5. The Court discussed decisions of the Kerala High Court and the Bombay High Court related to similar issues.
6. The Additional Solicitor General requested tagging the appeal with other pending appeals, emphasizing the distinct regimes for goods and services.
7. The Court noted substantial legal grounds raised by the Union Government during oral hearings.
8. The judgment under review did not consider the Union of India's submissions, focusing only on the respondents' arguments.
9. Considering the potential ramifications and the pending appeals, the Court allowed the review to ensure a comprehensive consideration of the issue.
10. The Court directed administrative actions to consolidate all related appeals for expedited hearing and tagged the present appeal with the others.
11. The Court refrained from making findings on allegations of breach of natural justice, as the appeal was restored for final disposal.
12. Pending the final disposal of the appeal, the Court directed that no coercive recovery steps be taken for the dues in question.