TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 330
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....15 towards the service tax demand of Rs.17,22,685/- along with interest and penalty. 2. The issue raised in the present appeal is whether the activity of letting out shops/AARATHS and other premises for shops and canteen, banks, etc. is liable to service tax. Both sides agree that the issue has been decided in Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, New Mandi Yard Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Alwar 2017(4)GSTL 346. The Tribunal referring to the Education Guide dated 20.06.2012 issued by the Board that any service provided by such bodies, which is not directly related to the agriculture and agricultural produce will be liable to tax e.g. renting of shops or other properties, passed the following order:- "18. In view of the above ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he fact that, on and after 1-7-2012, such activity by the Market Committees is put in the Negative List, it can safely be said that under the 2006 circular, the Market Committees were not exempted from payment of service tax on such activities. At this stage, it is required to be noted that it is not the case on behalf of the Market Committees that the activity of rent/lease on shop/land/platform as such cannot be said to be service. However, their only submission is that the Market Committees are exempted from levy of service tax on such service/activity as provided under the 2006 circular, which as observed hereinabove has no substance." 4. On the main issue whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax stands decided and in that v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r (Appeals). In this appeal, at para-5 of the "Statement of facts" portion, the party has taken into account the rent receipts of Kisaan Bazar, PCO, Gol Market, Canteen and Sabji Mandi only and sum total of these rent receipts is shown below Rs.10 lakhs, but they have not added the rent receipts of "Godown", "B" & "C" category of shops and "Vacant space(fad)". As I have already observed in the preceding paras that the total amount received by the party against rent of property from all the clients has been found correct by the Commissioner(Appeals) for the purpose of arriving at aggregate value. Hence bifurcation of rent receipts at this stage will not be in conformity to the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). I further find that the part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 30.12.2013, the total amount of rent receipt was Rs.18,84,459/- which implies that the party had already crossed the threshold limit of Rs.10 lakhs in the financial year 2008-09 itself. Therefore, benefit of aforesaid exemption notification cannot be given to the party for the succeeding year i.e. for the financial year 2009-10." 6. On appeal, the order has been affirmed, observing that the total receipts of the appellant during the subsequent financial years from 2009-10 to 2012-13 were above the threshold limit for the exemption and hence they are not eligible to SSI exemption benefit. 7. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Authorities below ought to have bifurcated the rent of shop into exempted rents a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vices rendered by the service provider from one or more premises shall not exceed Rs.10 lakhs in the preceding financial year. It is not permissible to pick and choose from the notification what is beneficial and discard what is against the party. The Notification has to be considered in entirety and the party claiming the benefit therein has also to satisfy the conditions enumerated therein. The Apex Court in Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti (supra) has observed that it is a settled law that the notification has to be read as a whole and if any of the conditions laid down in the notification is not fulfilled, the party is not entitled to the benefit of the notification and exception or exempting provisions in the taxing statute should be construed....