2024 (11) TMI 1308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....EI received an intelligence through the sources that M/s Sagar Builders Pvt. Ltd. has constructed the Commercial Complex known as Radha-Krishan Textile Market and after completion of the construction of said complex, they have sold number of shops and given number of shops on rent. Officer searched the said premises and noticed that there are some shops left unsold, belonging to the Appellant and are given on rent. This activity of renting shops fall under the taxable category of "Renting of Immovable Property" classified under the heading 65(105)zzzz of Finance Act 1994. It was contended that the Appellant has given 115 shops on rent to various tenants and collected the rent yearly basis in cash and suppressed the income generated from ren....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... data & details both the authorities confirmed the total service tax demand. 2.2 He also argued that in the present matter revenue has calculated the service tax demand on hypothetical basis on the basis of assumption only on the basis of shop owners' statements regarding the payment to agent in cash, however no cash receipts has been found by the department from the tenants. Therefore, it is clear that the department has wrongly demanded the excess service tax and demand of service tax required to reduce from 25,81,955/- to Rs. 9,52,944/- against the Appellant. 2.3 He also submits that Appellant was not liable for penalty on amount of service tax which has been already paid prior to issue of show cause notice. 3. On other hand Shri ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nnot be accepted as admissible piece of evidence. No cash receipts has been relied upon by the department, no financial flow back has been relied upon by the department for the alleged collection of rent in cash, no rent agreement has been found by the department for the support of excess rent , no ledger entry in the books of accounts of the appellant found for so called excess collected rent. Moreover, none of the persons on whose statements reliance was placed by the department were cross-examined by the Ld. Adjudicating authority in the present matter. Clearly, the Adjudicating Authority had failed to follow the requirement of Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding examination in chief of witness, therefore quantification ....