9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (2) TMI 70 - AT - Service TaxSeeking adjournment where stay application was listed for hearing on several occasions - Renting of Immovable Property - appellant is the Municipal Corporation and rented out commercial properties - Held that - the appellants have not made prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit. - the appellants are directed to make pre-deposit of 30, 00, 000/- (Rupees Thirty lakhs only) in six equal monthly instalments and the first instalment commences by 03.12.2015 and the last instalment in the month of May 2016 and report compliance on 26.05.2016. - stay granted partly.
Issues:
1. Stay application repeatedly adjourned - disposal of the application. 2. Service tax demand on renting of immovable property by Municipal Corporation. 3. Arguments on pre-deposit - comparison with similar cases - Tribunal's consistent orders. 4. High Court and Supreme Court rulings on pre-deposit - modification of Tribunal's order - directions for pre-deposit in instalments. Issue 1: The stay application filed by the appellant was repeatedly adjourned due to the unavailability of senior counsel, despite multiple opportunities given by the Bench. The Tribunal found no valid reason for further adjournment and decided to dispose of the stay application. Issue 2: The case involved a service tax demand of Rs. 1,41,35,954 on the Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation for providing 'Renting of Immovable Property Service' for commercial purposes like markets and shopping complexes. The Commissioner confirmed the demand under Section 73(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, along with interest, while dropping the penal proceedings. Issue 3: The appellant's advocate sought adjournment without substantive arguments, while the respondent relied on previous Tribunal orders for pre-deposit in similar cases of other municipalities. The Tribunal noted that there was no dispute regarding the service provided and ordered pre-deposit based on Supreme Court rulings and High Court decisions upholding pre-deposit orders. Issue 4: Referring to the Supreme Court's directions on payment of arrears in instalments, the Tribunal modified its order to direct the appellant to deposit Rs. 30,00,000 in six equal monthly instalments starting from January 2015. Failure to deposit any instalment would allow the Tribunal to proceed as per law. The appellant, being a Municipal Corporation renting out commercial properties, was directed to comply with the pre-deposit order by May 2016, following the High Court's precedent. The stay application was disposed of accordingly.
|
