9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 1283 - AT - Service TaxLevy of service tax - Renting of immovable property service - Amount relatable to Copy Right Services - Amount already paid and not adjusted - Short Claim of Property Tax - Amount already paid but not adjusted - HELD THAT - There was no service tax demand on 'Copy Right Service'. Copy Rights Service as defined under Section 65(zzzzt) of the Finance Act 1994, specifically excludes the right covered under sub-clause(a) of clause(1) of Section 13 of the said Act, which deals with copy rights related to 'Original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works' - it is found that the Copy Rights service rendered by the Appellant are related to 'Original Artistic Works' which are excluded from payment of service tax. Accordingly, the demand of service tax amounting to Rs.8,41,684/- is not sustainable. Even otherwise, there was no demand of service tax under the category of 'Copy Right Service' in the Notice. Hence, the demand of service tax of Rs.8,41,684/- confirmed in the impugned order is not sustainable on this count also. Regarding the remaining demand confirmed in the impugned order, the Appellant stated that as per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Lessees paid Rs.1,91,121/- which has not been taken into account by the adjudicating authority. They further stated that the adjudicating authority has excluded Property Tax amounting to Rs.56,83,647/-. However, actual property tax paid was Rs. 57,66,009/- Thus, an additional amount of Rs 82,362/- has also to be excluded on account of property tax. They also stated that there was a short adjustment of Rs.40,087/-paid by them which has not been appropriated - the claim of the Appellant on these counts needs to be verified by the adjudicating authority. For that purpose, the matter needs to be remanded back to the adjudicating authority. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the demand of service tax under 'Renting of Immovable Property Service' and 'Copy Right Service', as well as the appropriateness of interest and penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. Renting of Immovable Property Service: The Appellant, a registered entity under Service Tax, received a Show Cause Notice demanding service tax and Cess totaling Rs.1,48,07,289/- for the period April 2010 to March 2011. The Order-in-Original confirmed a demand of Rs. 91,23,642/- along with interest and penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Appellant contended that out of the confirmed demand, they had already paid Rs. 79,68,379/-, and the appeal dealt with the remaining amount of Rs.11,55,263/- along with interest and penalty. The Appellant argued that a portion of the demand related to Copy Right Services, which were excluded from payment of service tax under Section 65(zzzzt) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found that the demand of Rs.8,41,684/- for Copy Right Services was not sustainable as there was no demand for service tax under this category in the Notice. Verification of Claims: The Appellant also raised issues regarding payments made by lessees, property tax adjustments, and short payments. They claimed that after considering these factors, there would be no further liability for service tax. The Tribunal observed that these claims needed verification by the adjudicating authority and remanded the matter back for the same. The demand confirmed for Copy Right Services was set aside, and interest and penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 were also set aside for this part of the demand. The appeal was disposed of with these terms, emphasizing the need for verification of the Appellant's claims.
|
