9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsp;Mohta and Mr Pankaj Patel Respondent Represented by: Mr H C Bhatia with Mr Pratap Singh Parmar for R 1 & 3/UOI. Mr Sumit Batra for Mr MukeshAnand for R-2 & 4 ORDER CM Nos. 6828-6829/2010 Allowed subject to all just exceptions. WP(C) 3398/2010 & CM 6827/2010 In this writ petition there is a challenge to Section 65(105) (zzzz) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service. This Court also took the view that real estate by itself cannot by any stretch of imagination be regarded as a service. This Court also held that insofar as renting of immovable property for use in the course or furtherance of business or commerce is concerned, no value addition is discernible. It was consequently observed that the renting of immovable property for such purposes by itself ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame are ultra vires the said Act and to the extent that they authorize the levy of service tax on renting of immovable property per se, they are set aside." It is perhaps as a consequence of this decision, which is the subject matter of an appeal before the Supreme Court in which no stay has been granted, that the present amendment has been introduced to Section 65(105)(zzzz) by virtue of the Fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice so as to be exigible to service tax. Prima facie, it appears that renting of immovable property itself has been regarded as a service by virtue of the recent amendment even though this Court by virtue of the said decision on 18.04.2009 had categorically concluded that renting of immovable property by itself cannot be regarded as a service. Issue Notice. Notice is accepted by the couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
