2023 (12) TMI 376

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....agents. The Central Excise Audit conducted took the view that the Appellant is required to pay the Service Tax on Reverse Charge basis for such commission paid. 2. Further, the Appellant has provided residential accommodation to their staff and officers. For such accommodation, rent has been recovered from the salaries paid to the employees. Appellants have also given certain commercial properties on rent. The Audit took the view that the Appellant is required to pay Service Tax on "Renting of Immovable Property". The Appellant was issued Show Cause Notice demanding Rs. 25,49,689/- on account of "Renting of Immovable Property Service". They were issued Show Cause Notice demanding Rs. 56,52,175/- on "Business Auxiliary Service" to be paid o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., he submits that the Department is in error in invoking the extended period and confirming the demand for the entire period involved. He submits that the demand for the extended period is required to be set aside on this count also. 5. In respect of the „Renting of Immovable Property‟, he submits that out of the Service Tax demand of Rs. 25,49,689/- on the rent received, the component of Service Tax on account of the rent received from the employees amounts to Rs. 9,52,080/-. In respect of rent received from Commercial Property, the Service Tax demand stands at Rs. 15,97,609/-. He submits that Section 65 (105) (zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 was amended on 20/06/2010. Only after this amendment, the Renting of Immovable Propert....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....spite of the amendment brought out on 20/06/2010, the Appellant did not pay the Service Tax on Commercial Properties rented out by them. 9. Heard both sides and perused the Appeal Papers and other documents placed before us. 10. The Jute per se is being traded in the Commodity Exchange for being bought or sold. On the other hand, the Hessian Cloth manufactured by the Appellant by using this jute is a separate independent commodity which is being bought and sold for different purposes. The Hessian Cloth does not fall under the category of "Agricultural Produce" as per the definition given in the Explanation given in the Notification No. 13/2003-ST dated 20/06/2003. The reliance placed by the Appellant in the case of M/s. Glenworth Estate L....