9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd merely because they also happen to be the Directors of the appellant would not mean that they had collected rent as Directors of the appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals) assumed that Naveen Sawhney and D.K. Prashar are providing service of renting of immovable property as Directors of the appellant, whereas they are providing the said service in their individual capacity as owners of the premises and not as Directors of the appellant - The appellant, in such a situation, could not have been asked to pay service tax on a reverse charge mechanism. What needs to be further noticed is that service tax had been deposited on the rent received by Naveen Sawhney and D.K. Prashar from the appellant. The order dated 07.05.2018 passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant invoking the extended period of limitation alleging that: (i) The appellant during July 2012 to August 2014 had paid the rent to the tune of Rs. 2,73,01,852/- to the landlord/owner of the premises and they happened to be, at the relevant time, Director of the appellant and, therefore, service tax of Rs. 33,74,509/- was payable by the appellant on reverse charges basis in accordance with Notification dated 20.06.2012 as amended by Notification dated 07.08.2012; and (ii) The appellant had not obtained registration for renting of immoveable property services nor filed any ST-3 return for the said services. 4. The appellant submitted a reply to the show cause notice but the Deputy Commissioner, by order dated 14.03.2017, co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been considered. 8. The premises which were let out to the appellant are owned by Naveen Sawhney and D.K. Prashar in their individual capacity and it is not the case of the department that the properties were owned by them as Directors of the appellant. In such a situation, rent was collected by them in their individual capacity and merely because they also happen to be the Directors of the appellant would not mean that they had collected rent as Directors of the appellant. 9. The relevant portion of the Notification dated 20.06.2012, as amended by Notification dated 07.08.2012 relied upon by the department, wherein the description of services, the person liable to pay service tax and the extent of service tax payable by such person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as amended by Notification dated 07.08.2012, has been specified at serial no. 5A of the Table at paragraph (II) of the said Notification and the relevant portion is reproduced as follows: Table Sl.No. Description of a Service Percentage of service tax payable by the person providing service Percentage of service tax payable by the person receiving the service 5A In respect of services provided or agreed to be provided by a director of a company to the said company Nil 100% 11. The person liable to pay service tax under the reverse charge mechanism has also been stipulated under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
