Appellate Tribunal dismisses appeals challenging service tax on renting immovable property.

The Appellate Tribunal dismissed appeals and stay petitions by M/s Inox Air Products Ltd. challenging service tax demand on 'renting of immovable property service'. The Tribunal found the appeals not maintainable due to pending proceedings before the Bombay High Court regarding the vires of the levy and the uncertainty of whether the transaction attracted service tax or VAT liability. It emphasized the prohibition against seeking remedies from multiple forums simultaneously and advised seeking restoration of appeals upon obtaining suitable direction from the High Court.

---

---

Issues:
1. Confirmation of service tax demand on renting of immovable property service.
2. Challenge to the vires of the levy before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court.
3. Pending decision on whether the transaction attracts service tax or VAT liability.
4. Maintainability of appeals and stay petitions before the Appellate Tribunal.

Confirmation of service tax demand on renting of immovable property service:
The judgment pertains to appeals and stay petitions arising from Orders-in-Original confirming service tax demand on 'renting of immovable property service'. The adjudicating authority confirmed a demand of &8377; 10,04,20,255/- for June 2007 to March 2011 and &8377; 1,35,90,586/- for April 2011 to March 2012, along with interest and penalties under sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant, M/s Inox Air Products Ltd., challenged these orders before the Appellate Tribunal.

Challenge to the vires of the levy before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court:
The appellant had initially challenged the vires of the levy on service tax before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in a Writ Petition. The High Court had passed interim directions stating that no coercive steps for recovery of service tax should be taken from the Petitioner pending a decision. Subsequently, the appellant sought clarification from the High Court on whether the transaction attracted service tax or VAT liability. The High Court continued the interim relief, and the matter remained pending before it.

Pending decision on whether the transaction attracts service tax or VAT liability:
Despite the impugned orders, neither the appellant nor the Revenue had approached the Hon'ble High Court for further directions. As it is established that seeking remedies from two forums simultaneously is impermissible, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeals and stay petitions as not maintainable at that point. The Tribunal suggested that if the appellant obtained suitable direction from the High Court, they could apply for restoration of the appeals.

Maintainability of appeals and stay petitions before the Appellate Tribunal:
Given the pending nature of the matter before the Hon'ble High Court and the principle against seeking remedies from multiple forums simultaneously, the Appellate Tribunal found the appeals and stay petitions not maintainable. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant could seek restoration of the appeals upon obtaining appropriate direction from the High Court. The judgment highlights the importance of following procedural requirements and avoiding parallel proceedings in different forums.

---