Page 143 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

2020 ] GYAN SONS v. COMMR. OF CGST & C. EX. (APPEALS), ALLAHABAD 229
6. We find that the Trade Notice relied upon by the Revenue was never
incorporated in the Finance Act by way of an amendment. Therefore, in the ab-
sence of any statutory backing, the Revenue cannot demand tax relying solely
upon a Trade Notice or Circular issued by the Department itself. We are of the
view that Trade Notices or Circulars can be relied upon to clarify the existing
statutory provisions and such notices or circulars cannot have any bearing on the
scope of the statutory provision or the legislative intent behind such provisions.
Therefore, the Trade Notice relied upon by the Revenue would not suffice in up-
holding the demand of service tax against the Appellant.
7. Since, we have decided the instant case on merits, we refrain from
visiting the issue of limitation. In view of the above discussion, the appeal filed
by the Appellant is allowed.
(Pronounced in the open Court)

_______

2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 229 (Tri. - All.)

IN THE CESTAT, REGIONAL BENCH, ALLAHABAD
[COURT NO. I]
Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) and Shri Anil G. Shakkarwar,
Member (T)
GYAN SONS

Versus
COMMR. OF CGST & C. EX. (APPEALS), ALLAHABAD
Final Order No. ST/A/71832/2019-CU(DB), dated 30-10-2019
in Appeal No. ST/70198/2018
Renting of Immovable Property service - Assessee entering into
agreement with Reliance Industries for purchase and resale of its petroleum
products on consideration - Amount received from said company during peri-
od when there was no sale or purchase of its products, not liable to Service Tax
under the category of Renting of Immovable Property service particularly
when neither any agreement for renting of property entered into between
them nor any rent paid by said company even during that period when said
product purchased and resold by assessee - Sections 65(90a) and 65(105)(zzzz)
of Finance Act, 1994.
Appeal allowed
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Arvind Shukla, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Shri Santosh Kumar Agarwal, Authorized
Representative, for the Respondent.
[Order per : Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (T)]. - After hearing both the
sides duly represented by Shri Arvind Shukla, Learned Advocate appearing on
behalf of the appellant and Shri Santosh Kumar Agarwal, Learned AR appearing
on behalf of the respondent, we note that during the period from 2009/2010 to
GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  143