9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Mr. A.K. Batra appeared For The Respondent : Ms. Neha Garg (DR) Per: B. Ravichandran: The appeal is against order dated 26.09.2013 of Commissioner (Appeals) Delhi-I. The dispute involved in the present appeal is relating to liability of the appellant to pay service tax on a consideration received for letting out a building to M/s Plasser (India) Pvt. Ltd. for use of Sh. Thomas Hentze for resi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (Appeals) vide the impugned order reversed the decision and held that the appellants are liable to service tax. He also imposed penalty under section 78 & 77 of the Finance Act, 1984. 2. The Ld. Consultant for the appellant submitted that the lease agreement clearly brings out the purpose of letting out the property. There is a clear bar in using this property for other than residential purpos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n various judicial forums. In fact, renting per se was held to be not taxable by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Home Solutions Retail (I) Ltd. 2011 (24) S.T.R. 129 (Del.) resulting in amendment, including retrospective amendment in the statutory provisions for the said tax entry. As such, the demand cannot invoke extended period as the issue was not free from doubt. In the present case, the whole ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id premises, the same will not make it use of premises other than the residence. 6. We also note that the appellant do have a strong case on limitation. Admittedly the tax liability on his particular tax entry has been a subject matter of substantial litigation. As observed above, Hon'ble Delhi High Court even held that renting per se is not liable to service tax and it is only services in relati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
