2026 (8) TMI 1306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inafter referred to as 'the Appellant') against two distinct impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Ludhiana. 1.1 By way of Order-in-Appeal No. LUD-EXCUS-001-APP-69-17-18 dated 30.05.2017 and Order-in-Appeal No. LUD-EXCUS-001-APP-72- 17-18 dated 31.05.2017, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the respective Orders-in-Original dated 29.01.2016 and 28.03.2016. The relevant particulars of both the appeals are detailed in the table below: Appeal No. ST/60929/2017 ST/60930/2017 Period 2007-08 to 2011-12 2013-14 Show Cause Notice/ Statement dated 18.09.2012 09.03.2015 Demand Rs. 1,81,937/- Rs. 50,190/- Order-in-Original 14/CE&ST/AC/Div- Moga/2015-16 dated 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submitted that the renting of property during the period upto 2011-12 is not taxable at the hands of the Appellant being a Municipal Council. He further submitted that as per Section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994, w.e.f. 01.06.2007 'Renting of Immovable Property Service' is defined as "Service provided to any person, by any other person, by renting of immovable property or any other service in relation to such renting, for use in the course of or, for furtherance of, business or commerce." He further submitted that immovable property on the renting of which service tax demand has been confirmed, belongs to the Appellant and the same was rented out by the Appellant itself and accordingly, the same cannot be taxed in the hands of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 406066 406066 10 Lakhs 5. On the other hand, the learned Authorized Representative for the department reiterated the findings of the impugned orders. 6. We have considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that during the relevant period, the Appellant, constituted under Section 18 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, is a body corporate functioning as a Municipal Council. The statutory data already available on the records of the Department clearly reveals that the Appellant's gross taxable turnover in each of the disputed financial years was well below the prescribed threshold limits of Rs. 4 Lakhs Rs. 8 Lakhs and Rs. 10 Lakhs, respectively. Consequently, the....