2013 (3) TMI 56

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....immovable property. W.e.f. 1/6/07 by virtue of Section 65 (105) (zzz) the service in relation to renting of immovable property became taxable. However, the validity of levy of tax on this service was challenged before Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Home solution Retail India and Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide judgement dated 18/4/09 reported in - 2009 (14) STR 433 (Del) held that the service of renting of immovable property by itself cannot be regarded as service. Subsequently by Finance Act, 2010, the Government amended Section 65 (105) (zzz) by expanding its scope to include even the renting of immovable property as service taxable under this entry with retrospective effect, On 19/11/10, a show cause notice was issued to t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... suppression of facts etc. on the part of the service provider. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed challenging invoking of extended period under Section 73 (1) of the Central Excise Act and upholding the imposition of penalty under Section 78. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Kapil Vaish, CA;, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that in the circumstances of the case, the extended period was not invokable, that though the service in relation to renting of immovable property had been brought within the service tax net by Section as 65 (105) (zzz) w.e.f 1/6/07, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Home Solution Retail India (supra) had held that this entry does not cover the ren....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty, that this amounts to suppressing the relevant facts from the department and, hence, extended period has been correctly invoked and penalty under Section 78 had been correctly imposed. He, therefore, pleaded that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 5. I have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 6. There is no dispute that the activity of the appellant was renting of immovable property. Though "service in relation to renting of immovable property" had been brought within the service tax net w.e.f 1/6/07 by introducing Section 65 (105) (zzz), the validity of this levy had been challenged before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide judgment dated 18th April ....