Order date – 22 March 2023

Parties – M/s Shree Textile Prints Vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Surat-I

Facts –

• The Appellate, M/s Shree Textiles Prints, owns a vacant land surrounded by the boundary that has been rented.
• The appellate has paid the Service tax on the rented vacant land.
• Under the impugned order the refund of this service tax has been rejected on the time bar basis and on the ground of unjust enrichment.

Issues –

• Whether the renting of vacant land surrounded by boundary wall is liable for service tax or otherwise?
• Whether the tax paid on service of renting beyond one year from the relevant date is time barred under Section 11A ?
• Whether the refund of service tax paid on vacant land is hit by mischief of unjust enrichment?

Order –

• The Tribunal, with regard to the first issue, referring to the definition of “renting of immovable property” under sub-section (90a)of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 held that, it can be seen that a vacant land has been excluded from the term “Immovable Property”. Further, the Court mentioned that on the vacant land there is only boundary wall which can be categorized as a facility incidental to use of such vacant land therefore, it is not liable for service tax being excluded from definition of immovable property.
• As regard to he second issue the Tribunal observed that, appellant have admittedly paid the service tax under the head of service tax of renting of immovable property service and the same was declared in the ST-3 returns as payment of service tax, therefore, the refund of service tax shall be governed by Section 11B.
• Considering the submissions and perusal of records, it is established that the appellant have passed on the incidence of service tax paid by them hence, the refund was rightly rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment also.
• The present appeal is dismissed, and the impugned order is upheld.