https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769799 CESTAT Kolkata dismissed the appeal, upholding the rejection of the appellant's service tax refund claim. The tribunal held that the appellant, receiving Rs. 32 lakh monthly lease rent for immovable property including plant, qualified under Section 65(105)(zzzz) of Finance Act 1994 for 'renting of immovable property service.' The leasing arrangement constituted taxable service under the Act's definition, making the appellant liable for service tax payment rather than entitled to refund. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 May 2025 08:54:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769799 CESTAT Kolkata dismissed the appeal, upholding the rejection of the appellant's service tax refund claim. The tribunal held that the appellant, receiving Rs. 32 lakh monthly lease rent for immovable property including plant, qualified under Section 65(105)(zzzz) of Finance Act 1994 for 'renting of immovable property service.' The leasing arrangement constituted taxable service under the Act's definition, making the appellant liable for service tax payment rather than entitled to refund. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769799