2025 (12) TMI 455

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng both sides are that the Assessee are engaged in renting out their immovable properties for a rental income. The Assessee do not raise any bill/invoice for the rent, receives the rent through cheque and tax is paid on such amount received. The amount received was inclusive of TDS and exclusive of proportionate property tax, water & sewerage tax and urban land tax. During the course of Internal Audit conducted by the officers of the Service Tax Commissionerate, Chennai, it was noticed that the Assessee had short paid Service Tax on three counts (i) Short paid Service Tax to the tune of Rs.89,914/- for the period from 2007- 08 to 2010-11 (Upto 9/2010) by wrongly deducting Water & Sewerage tax and Urban land tax from the taxable value (ii) S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....11 is bad and without jurisdiction. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the case of the Appellant and after hearing their representative, vide impugned Order-in-Appeal No.300/2015 (STA-II) dated 30.10.2015 has upheld the demand and thereby confirmed the OIO. It is against this OIA that the present appeal has been filed before this forum. 4. We have heard Ms. R. Maheswari, Ld. Advocate for the Appellant and Shri M. Selvakumar, Ld. Assistant Commissioner for the Respondent-Revenue. 5. It was contended by the Ld. Advocate that the Assessee vide their letter dated 20.07.2009 had communicated to the Superintendent of Central Excise-Service Tax about their inability to collect Service Tax from their tenants viz. M/s.Apollo Ho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s argued that an Audit was carried out in October 2009, the period of dispute is June 2009 to September 2009; Service Tax demand is for the period June 2009 to February 2010 which was paid by them on 31.03.2010 and 13.04.2010, which was before the issuance of SCN and hence, in terms of Section 73(3), the SCN under Section 73(1) should not have been issued by alleging suppression as the amount stands paid along with applicable interest. In this context, it was also contended that the invocation of extended period of limitation was clearly unjustified. 7. We have considered the rival contentions and carefully perused the documents placed on record before us; after hearing both the sides, the following issues arise for our consideration: ....