9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order as an issue involving question of interpretation of the provision of the law, as contended by the appellant that it is a question of interpretation for setting aside penalties u/s 76 & 77, the same reasoning would be applicable for penalties u/s 78. Accordingly, the imposition of service tax on renting of immovable properties, by invoking the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, penalty imposed is set aside. - Appeal No.ST/08/12 - Final Order No. A/10434/2013-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 18-3-2013 - Mr. M.V. Ravindaran , J. For the Appellant: Shri Kuntal Parikh, Adv For the Respondent : Shri J. Nagori, A.R. JUDGEMENT Per : Mr. M.V. Ravindran; This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No.158/2011 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded and recovered from the appellant. The above, observations culminated into issuance of show cause notice No. Vl(a)8-68/IA/ST/09-10 dated 28.07.2010 proposing to consider the services rendered by them as taxable service under the category of "Renting of Immovable Property" as defined under Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended and to recover Service Tax of Rs.48,083/- under Section 73(1) read with Section 68 of the finance Act, 1994, to appropriate the Service Tax amounting to Rs.3,89,012/- and interest amount to Rs.88,169/- already paid by the appellant, to recover the interest at the applicable rate on the amount of service tax liability of Rs.48,083/- for the non-payment of such service tax, under Section 75 of the Finance Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. For the proposition, he relies upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of C Ahead Info Technologies India P. Ltd. 2009 (14) STR 803 (Tri. Bang.) which has been upheld by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka as reported at 2012 (26) STR J25 (Kar.). 5. Ld. Additional Commissioner (A.R.) would on the other hand submit that the appellant had not paid the entire amount of the service tax liability before the issuance of show cause notice in fact he has made the part payment only. It is his submission that he is not in a position to ascertain whether the appellant is in appeal against this order for setting aside the penalties under Section 76, 77 78. 6. I have considered the submissions made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
