9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CESTAT CHENNAI] has considered the decisions of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CUDDALORE MUNICIPALITY VERSUS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF GST CENTRAL EXCISE, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX AND VIRUDHACHALAM MUNICIPALITY VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, CUDDALORE [ 2021 (4) TMI 500 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] , GV. MATHESWARAN VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [ 2015 (3) TMI 391 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and the subsequent decision in the case of ST. THOMAS MOUNT CUM PALLAVARAM CANTONMENT BOARD VERSUS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER OF GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI [ 2023 (4) TMI 1024 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and the remanded the case to the file o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and January 2012 to January 2013. For the subsequent periods also, three Statement of Demands were issued covering Feb 2013 to March 2013, April 2013 to March 2014 and April 2014 to March 2015 which came to be adjudicated by the Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No.1719-2016 dated 21.09.2016 demanding Service Tax with interest and also imposing equal penalty besides imposing penalties under Section 77 of the Act ibid. On appeal being filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), the Lower Appellate Authority has upheld the order of Original Authority. Hence this appeal. 3.1 None appeared for the appellant. As the similar appeals have already been decided based on available records this appeal is taken up for decision. 3.2 On perusal of record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd oral and other evidences and documents available on record. 7. The only issue that arises for determination in this appeal is whether the demand of service tax under the category of Renting of Immovable Property service on the appellant is sustainable or not? 8. Having heard the Ld. A.R., we find that in a similar case this Bench in the case of The Commissioner, Krishnagiri and Others Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise vide Final Nos. 40613-40615/2024 dated 04.06.2024 has considered the decisions of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Cuddalore Municipality Vs. Jt. Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise and (Others) - 2021 (4) TMI 500, G.V. Matheswaran Vs UOI 2014 - TIOL-2545-HC-MAD-ST and the subsequent decision in the case of St. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court in the case of St. Thomas Mount Cum Pallavaram Cantontment Board has remanded the matter for considering the issue afresh, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, these matters also required to be remanded to the adjudicating authority who shall await the judgment in the above case of Hon ble High Court. 10. It is to be seen that some of the amounts falling within the demand pertain to fees and charges collected for carrying out functions specifically listed in 12th schedule. Further, services are carried out as per the provisions of Panchayat Act, Municipalities Act etc. by which State has bestowed the local authority to carry out such functions and services. These issues are required to be examined. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
