Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (3) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... striction of creating an offence with retrospective effect or the restriction from enhancing the punishment for an offence with retrospective effect as found in Article 20(1) of the Constitution of India. - Writ petition dismissed - Decided against the assessee.
Sushil Harkauli and K.K. Trivedi, JJ. Shri G.N. Purohit, Sr. Counsel with Abhishek Oswal, for the Petitioner. Shri S.A. Dharmadhikari, Counsel, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Shri G.N. Purohit, learned senior counsel with Shri Abhishek Oswal for the petitioner. 2. Shri S.A. Dharamadhikari, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. This bunch of writ petitions challenges the imposition of 'service tax' on renting of immovable property. 4. By the Constitution 88th Amendment Act .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... retrospective effect. 9. This amendment as well as retrospectively of the same is under challenge. The challenge is primarily based on the same argument which were advanced and accepted by the Delhi High Court in the case of Home Solutions Retail India Limited (supra). 10. It has also been argued that retrospectivity was not permissible because this amendment to the definition of "taxable service" is not merely clarificatory but brings about a substantive liability of taxation upon the service providers. It has also been contended that by giving a retrospective effect to this amendment to the definition of "taxable service", the service provider is also saddled with liability to pay interest as well as penalty on the default in payment of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tax liability. 13. In the case of T.N. Kalyana Mandapam Association v. Union of India and Others, reported in 2004 (5) SCC 632 = 2006 (3) S.T.R. 260 (S.C.) = 2004 (167) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), the Supreme Court has held in paragraph 54 and 55 of that law report as under : "54. Therefore, a levy of service tax on a particular kind of service could not be struck down on the ground that it does not conform to a common understanding of the word "service" so long as it does not transgress any specific restriction contained in the Constitution. 55. In fact, making available a premises for a period of a few hours for the specific purpose of being utilized as a mandap whether with or without other services would itself be a service and cannot be classi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates