TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant wins case for service tax credit on renting immovable property - pre-deposit waived, recovery stayed.</h1> <h3>M/s. Shreno Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore</h3> M/s. Shreno Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore - 2014 (35) S.T.R. 963 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues:1. Admissibility of input service tax credit for renting of immovable property service.2. Denial of service tax credit leading to demand confirmation.3. Pre-deposit requirement based on previous tribunal decisions.4. Applicability of previous tribunal decisions on service tax credit.Analysis:1. The appellant, engaged in renting of immovable property service, utilized input service tax of service tax paid on construction services for the period from October 2008 to March 2009. The denial of such input service tax credit led to the confirmation of the demand for service tax credit amounting to Rs.1,79,582/- along with interest and penalty of Rs.2,000/-. The issue revolved around the admissibility of this input service tax credit.2. The appellant's authorized representative argued that the appellant had filed written submissions, urging the consideration of the matter. Referring to previous tribunal decisions, the Addl. Commissioner highlighted the requirement for pre-deposit based on stay orders in specific cases. The appellant relied on the decision in the case of Navaratna S.G. Highway Prop. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST and the High Court decision in the case of Commissioner vs. Sai Samhita Storages Pvt. Ltd. to support the admissibility of the service tax credit.3. After considering the submissions from both sides, the tribunal analyzed the previous decisions cited by the Addl. Commissioner and the appellant. It was noted that the services considered in the previous cases were different from the services under consideration in the current case. The tribunal observed that the construction service, which was the subject of denial of service tax credit, was one of the services listed in the 26 services for which the credit had been taken and held admissible in the Navaratna S.G. Highway Prop. Pvt. Ltd. decision. Consequently, the tribunal waived the pre-deposit requirement and stayed the recovery during the appeal's pendency.4. The tribunal's decision was based on the applicability of previous tribunal decisions and the interpretation of the admissibility of service tax credit for specific services. By analyzing the precedents and the specific services involved, the tribunal found that the appellant's case aligned with the decision of the coordinate bench in Ahmedabad, supporting the admissibility of the service tax credit for construction services. This analysis led to the waiver of the pre-deposit requirement and the stay of recovery during the appeal process.
TaxTMI 