Classification of Renting as Service Tax upheld by Court

The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the classification of "Renting of immovable property" as a declared service under Service Tax provisions. Citing a previous case where a similar relief was denied, the Court held that the provision was valid and within legislative competence. As there was no stay order by the Supreme Court, respondents were directed to comply with the existing provision. The petition was dismissed without costs, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to the classification of "Renting of immovable property" as a declared service under Service Tax provisions.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought a declaration that the classification of "Renting of immovable property" as a declared service under Service Tax provisions was illegal, ultra vires, and unconstitutional. The argument was based on the contention that the provision exceeded the legislative competence of the Parliament and should be struck down. The petitioner aimed to bring this service under the definition of "Service" for the purpose of charging Service Tax.

The Court noted that a similar matter had been previously adjudicated by a Division Bench in the case of G.V. Matheswaran Vs. Union of India {2015 (37) STR – 881 – Madras}, where the writ petition for the same relief was dismissed. The petitioner's request to keep the instant writ petition pending until a decision by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court was also rejected. The Court emphasized that the provision had been upheld in the previous case, and there was no stay order by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the respondents were directed to act in accordance with the existing provision. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the law as it stands today upholds the classification of "Renting of immovable property" as a declared service under the Service Tax provisions.

In conclusion, the Court refused to entertain the writ petition challenging the classification of "Renting of immovable property" as a declared service under the Service Tax provisions. The decision was based on the precedent set by a previous case where a similar relief was denied. The Court emphasized that since there was no stay order by the Supreme Court on the existing provision, the respondents were required to adhere to the current legal framework. Therefore, the petition was dismissed, and no costs were imposed, with the connected Miscellaneous Petitions being closed as a result of the judgment.

---