9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not arise. We find that the appellants did not own the piece of land on which the commercial building was constructed in-as-much-as it was only leased to them for 30 years by Municipal Corporation, Raipur and therefore the commercial building which they constructed thereon could not have been sold by them because they cannot sell what they do not own. - having regard to the appellants plea that the advances received had been subsequently adjusted in the rental/lease income shown on which service tax has been demanded and that they should be extended the cum-tax benefit, we order pre-deposit of 75 lakhs within 8 weeks - Partial stay granted. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her hand, ld. Departmental Representative argued that it is a case of simple lease of immovable property and the appellants could not have sold it because they themselves acquired the piece of land on lease for 30 years. He also added that while giving on lease for 30 years, they had put conditions with regard to use of the property and therefore it was incorrect to say that they had given up all their rights. 3. We have considered the contentions of both sides. There is no dispute regarding liability to service tax on the monthly rental income received except on the issue of admissibility of "SSI" benefit with regard thereto. However, if the income received from 30 year-lease of property is considered to be taxable, the question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... derived from leasing of property is clearly covered under the definition of "Renting of Immovable Property". We find that in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs. CCEST, Noida [Final Order No.ST/A/58664/2013, dated 11.12.2013], CESTAT has come to a similar finding and the judgement of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. Vs. DCIT-[2012-TIOL-515-HC-DEL-IT], referred to by the ld. counsel for the appellants has been dealt with in the said judgement. The judgement of Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (supra) cited by the appellants also does not come to their rescue because prima facie the issue is more directly covered by the judgement of CESTAT in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
