2012 (11) TMI 212 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit of Service tax liability,interest and Penalty - Renting out of Immovable Property - Benefit of SSI Exemption Notification No.6/2005-ST dated 01.3.2005 - Held that - Assessee has not crossed the threshold limit of rupees ten lakhs about the aggregate value of the taxable services rendered in the preceding financial year and in this case individually all the appellants be considered as provider of such service - applications for waiver of pre-deposit of amounts are allowed and recoveries thereof stayed till disposal of appeals.

Summary

Issues:
Service tax liability on individuals as providers of service under renting out of immovable property.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with three applications against a common order for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax liability, interest, and penalties confirmed against each appellant under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The issue revolves around the service tax liability on the individuals as providers of service under the category of renting out of immovable property.

The appellants, who are co-owners of a building rented out to a bank, argued that the amount received by them falls within the threshold limit of SSI exemption as per specific notifications. They contended that the Revenue wrongly considered the amounts collectively received by all appellants and sought to charge service tax liability individually. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative argued that since the property is jointly owned and rented out, service tax liability should be assessed collectively based on the amounts received by individual appellants.

Upon analyzing the submissions, the Tribunal found that the SSI exemption notification grants exemption from service tax per year if the aggregate value of taxable services rendered does not exceed a specified threshold. Considering the notifications and the individual appellants as providers of the service, their aggregate value did not surpass the threshold limit. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the appellants had established a case for the waiver of pre-deposit of amounts involved. As a result, the applications for waiver of pre-deposit were allowed, and recoveries were stayed pending the disposal of appeals.