TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 447X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hops to the traders is not in terms of the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 or the rules made thereunder. In fact, allotments of land and shops were made by the appellants in terms of the Immovable Property Allotment Rules, 2005 and the fees are received for such allotments, thus, the arrangement for Renting of Immovable Property for a consideration. The claim of the appellant that the allotment of shop or land to the traders cannot be considered as renting of immovable property is not tenable. Extended period of limitation - penalty - Held that:- The tax entry renting of immovable property service itself was subject matter of serious litigation in various judicial forum - also, considering the status of the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore this Tribunal. 2. We have heard Shri Ankit Sharma, CA for the appellant and Shri R.K. Majhi, Ld. DR for the Department. 3. It is submitted on behalf of appellant that Samiti has been constituted for the welfare of agriculturist and is governed by the parent body Rajasthan State Agricultural Market Board, the functions performed by it are statutory duties prescribed by the State and therefore it is not taxable under service tax. These services stand exempted from the whole of service tax w.e.f. 01.07.2012 after the introduction of negative list of services vide insertion of Section 66D(iv) and (vii) of the Finance Act, 1994. Order is accordingly prayed to be set aside and Appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. Ld. DR on the other ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ission of the appellant that such renting out of shop/land is a mandatory/sovereign function carried out by the appellant. There is no support for such assertion. As such, we find that the appellant are liable to Service Tax on the considerations received by them for renting out the shop/land to traders and others for activities of furtherance of commerce. 5.3 However, we note that with the introduction of Negative List Regime of Taxation w.e.f. 1-7-2012, the appellants services were excluded from the tax liability. The relevant provisions of Section 66D are as below :- 66D. The negative list shall comprise of the following services, namely :- (a) ---- (b) ---- (c) ---- (d) services relating to agricultu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the scope of 66D(iv) and (vii) (as discussed above), the appellant is held liable to pay service tax. 6. We therefore, do not find any infirmity in the Order under challenge as far as the confirmation of demand alongwith the order of appropriation of amount as was deposited by the appellant under VESC Scheme is concerned. However, we also note that the tax entry renting of immovable property service itself was subject matter of serious litigation in various judicial forum. In fact, the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Home Solutions Retail Ltd. v. Union of India - 2011 (21) S.T.R. 109 (Delhi) held that the activity of the rent per se cannot be subjected to Service Tax levy, whereas the activities in relation to renting a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
