TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 760
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the investigations conducted, it was revealed that appellant was paying service tax upto 31.03.2005 and thereafter did not pay service tax claiming the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification 6/2005-ST dt.1.3.2005. They also surrendered their registration on 29.8.2005 and thereafter did not pay service or file returns. Investigation revealed that appellants was also rendering Renting of Immovable Property Service (RIPS) and thus their total aggregate value of services exceeded the threshold limit and was liable to pay tax on both services. A Show Cause Notice was issued demanding Service tax alongwith interest and after adjudication, the Original Authority confirmed the demand, interest and imposed penalties. In appeal, the Commissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s person unlike partners, firm and that they have to be treated as individual assessee according to their share of ownership in the property. That basic exemption limit has to be reckoned accordingly. The Ld.Consultant submitted that appellant is not contesting the levy of Mandap Keeper Services and is confining the contest on this issue with regard to the penalty imposed. He requested that the levy of service tax on Renting of Immovable Property Service may be set aside. 3. Against this, the Ld.AR, Shri K.Veerabhadra Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order. M/s.Green Palace, Pudukottai had surrendered their registration after 01-04-2005 claiming that they were within the exemption limit of Rs. 4 lakhs in terms of the Notificat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....artnership firm. It is brought out very clearly from the Income tax returns filed by them that the income received from Mandap Keeper Services is assessed as income from partnership firm, whereas the income received by letting out shops is assessed as individual income under the heading income from 'house property'. Therefore, the contention raised by the appellant is not without substance. They have consistently put forward this defense which has not been considered by the authorities below. We therefore conclude that the Renting of Immovable Property Services is not rendered by the firm and the same cannot be clubbed with the services rendered by the firm. The demand in respect of renting of Immovable Property Services is set asid....