Service Tax on Renting - under challange

Others 815 views 2 replies

HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Home Solutions Retails Ltd. & Others

v.

UOI

W. P. (C) 3398/2010

May 18, 2010

FACTS

In this writ petition there is a challenge to section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 inasmuch as it purports to levy service tax on the renting of immovable property to be used for commercial / business purposes. This provision has been recently amended by the Finance Act, 2010 with retrospective effect from 1-6-2007.

HELD

Prima facie renting of immovable property itself has been regarded as a service by virtue of the recent amendment even though this Court by virtue of its decision on 18-4-2009 had categorically concluded that renting of immovable property by itself cannot be regarded as a service.

Issue notice. Notice is accepted by the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 4. Notice shall issue to respondent 5-10.

The respondents shall file the counter-affidavits within four weeks and the petitioner shall file the rejoinder/ affidavits thereto within two weeks thereafter. In the meanwhile, there shall be no recovery of service tax from the petitioner in respect of renting of immovable property alone. No such service tax would also be recovered from respondents 5-10 in the meanwhile.

It is made clear that in the event the writ petition is dismissed, the liability to pay service tax along with any other liability as a result of the demand made, will solely be that of the petitioner. We make it clear that there is no challenge in this writ petition to the second part of the aforesaid provision, namely, “any other service in relation to such renting” and consequently, if there is any other such service, the service provider would be liable to pay service tax on such service and in respect of this portion of the provision there is no stay.



 

Replies (2)

Confusion galore. Landlords at their wits end as law holds no liability- govt. retrospectively amends PART of the law-. law again stays that amendment till heard->

Where tenant is eligible for credit landlords may pay the ST on rent and enable the tenant to avail the credit.

Where no credit availablke to the tenant, OPTION: Take an indemnity OR pay under protest OR intimate rvenue that there is no clarity on the issue and therefore choosing not to pay.

Sir,

The Kerala High Court has held in a recent VAT case, that retrospective amendment in case of indirect taxes is bad in law, as the seller can nor recover taxes for past transaction from the buyer.


CCI Pro

Leave a Reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register