9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erosene and other essential goods to the farmers of Chhattisgarh State. The appellant have a series of godowns in the State of Chhattisgarh and these godowns are being let out to various fertilizers manufacturing companies for a consideration / rent and, thus, they have been providing services of 'renting of immovable property services' to various fertilizer manufacturing companies. The Department working on intelligence have investigated the matter and came to know that the appellants have been collecting Service Tax on renting of their godowns. However, they have not discharged their service tax liability on the amount received by them for renting of godowns during the period 2007-2008 to 2010-2011. After initiation of investigations, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded in the books of accounts of the appellant and as soon as the Department has approached the appellant with regard to non payment of service tax on rent earned by them, the entire amount of service tax along with interest have been deposited much before the show cause notice came to be issued. It has also been contested by the learned advocate that appellant has the genuine belief that 'renting of immovable property' was subject matter of dispute / litigation during the relevant period. It has further been added that Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Home Solution Retail India Ltd. vs. Union of India [2009 (14) STR 433(Del)] has held that mere 'renting of immovable property services' cannot be regarded as a service. In view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ' during the relevant period, the appellant have failed to discharge the service tax at the relevant time. However, same has been deposited as soon as the authorities have approached them. thus there was no valid ground for authorities to impose penalties on them. Learned advocate has relied upon certain decisions of this Tribunal in support of his arguments on the above points which are given below: 1. NM/s. Power Grid Corporation of India vs. CCE & ST Patna [2018 (7) TMI 617 -CESTAT-KOLKATA]; 2. Indian Institute of Technology vs. CST II Mumbai [2016 (42) STR 406 (Tri-Mum)]; 3. Gadkari Rangayatan vs. CST, Mumbai II [2014 (36) STR 406 (Tri-Mum)]; 4. Surat Municipal Corpn. vs. CCE, Surat 2006 (4) STR 44 (Tri-Del)]; 5. Best Und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovisions of section 78 specify that same can only be invoked in case of fraud, collusion, willful mis-statement, suppression of facts with intention to evade payment of service tax. We feel that assessee, in this particular case, never had any intention to evade Service tax as all the receipts of rents of various godown have been properly recorded in their books of accounts. The Service tax collected by them from their service receivers has also been recorded and deposited with the State Exchequer. We feel that it was only a case of confusion with regard to leviability of Service Tax on 'renting of immovable property services', which delayed the payment of service tax. Since the entire amount of service tax has already been deposited along ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
