TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1607
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.4.2015 157,32,19,353 173,57,28,534 2. ST/50191 /2021 11- 14/TPS/PC/C GST/DSC/20 20-21 dated 16.09.2020 (i) DL/ST/AE/Inq./Gr.I V.2/20/08/Pt. DDA dated 31.08.2010 (ii) DL-1/ST/R- V/AE/SCN/DDA/35/10 dated 11.02.2011 (iii) DL-I/ST/R- 5/AE/SCN/DDA/35/10 dated 27.03.2012 (iv) 97/Div.1/R- V/2012-13 dated 05.09.2012 20007-08 to 2009-10 1.4.2010 to 30.9.2010 1.10.2010 to 30.9.2011 1.10.2011 to 31.3.2012 7,49,31,38,305 28,22,92,609 1,56,10,51,094 15,95,43,883/- 2. The facts which resulted into the said adjudication are that the appellant is registered with the Service Tax department for rendering services in the nature of 'Mandap Keeper Service', Health and Fitness Service', 'Architect Service' and 'Club or Association Service' etc. During the audit of their records, it was observed that the appellants were not paying the service tax on the amounts received against rendering the activity of Renting of Immovable Property' for commercial use. However, neither the assessee was registered under this service nor was paying service tax on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Departmental Representative and after perusing the grounds of appeal and other record of the appeal memo, it is observed that the appellant has mentioned, in the appeal, that appellant is a statutory body and is the creature of the statute to provide for the development of Delhi according to plan and for matters ancilliary thereto. That for discharging the said functions under the said statutory mandate the appellant is not liable to pay service tax. However, the issue settled by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Alwar Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Alwar [(2022 ) 1 SCR 700] wherein it has been held that whenever the activity of any governmental authority/Government/any authority created under a statute amounts to be an activity for commerce, irrespective of the status of such an authority it is liable to pay service tax; 5.1 Coming to the activity rendered by the appellant on which the service tax has been demanded. It is observed that the service tax under all of the show cause notices has been demanded for rendering 'Renting of Immovable Property' service and Club Services by DDA while receiving the lease amount /premium and memb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... letting/giving on rent/lease, the Nazul lands on behalf of Central Government in the President of India on freehold basis and were receiving ground rent and one time premium holding it to be in the nature of land revenue. No doubt the object of DDA Act under which the appellant created was of development in State of Delhi. However, if the appellant was earning some profits while discharging any function under the statute, the same is liable to tax and that the amount is not the amount of statutory levy/fee which was to be deposited in Government treasury. It is apparent that the appellant has not been proved to be in the nature of statutory fee rather is admitted to be the amounts received against renting of immovable property. 5.5 Hon'ble Supreme Court in Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, New Mandi Yard, Alwar (supra) has discussed Circular No. 89/7/2006 dated 18.12.2006 which reads as follows: "A doubt has arisen whether such activities provided by a sovereign/public authority required to be provided under a statute can be considered as 'provision of service' for the purpose of levy of service tax. 2. The issue has been examined. The Board is of the view that the ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....filled, the party is not entitled to the benefit of that notification. An exception and/or an exempting provision in a taxing statute should be construed strictly and it is not open to the court to ignore the conditions prescribed in the relevant policy and the exemption notifications issued in that regard. 24. The exemption notification should be strictly construed and given a meaning according to legislative intendment. The Statutory provisions providing for exemption have to be interpreted in light of the words employed in them and there cannot be any addition or subtraction from the statutory provisions. 25. As per the law laid down by this Court in a catena of decisions, in a taxing statute, it is the plain language of the provision that has to be preferred, where language is plain and is capable of determining a defined meaning. Strict interpretation of the provision is to be accorded to each case on hand. Purposive interpretation can be given only when there is an ambiguity in the statutory provision or it results in absurdity, which is so not found in the present case. 5.6 As brought to notice, the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal vide Interim ....