Login | Register Now | Contact Us   
 

Finance Bill Proposes mandatory pre-deposit of duty or penalty or both before filing of AppealBudget 2014-15 : Sale of space for advertising has been made taxable except for print media.Budget 2014-15 : Radio Taxis are now taxable.Budget 2014-15 : Education : The definition of Auxiliary Education Services has been scraped.Budget 2014-15 : Works Contract : 2 slab rates prescribed in place of earlier 3 slabs.Budget 2014-15 : E-payment of Service tax is being made mandatory with effect from 01.10.2014.Budget 2014-15 : POPS: Definition of intermediary is being amended to include the intermediary of goods in its scope.

Business Auxiliary Services [Sec 65(105)(zzb)]
Effective upto 30th June, 2012
<A-B> <C-D> <E-H> <I-M> <N-R> <S-S> <T-Z>

Landmark Service Tax Judgment - Business Auxiliary Services 

INTRODUCED: With Effect From 1st July 2003
 
Contents
Scope
Exemption
Clarification
Relevant Notifications / Circulars
Landmark Judgements
News
Accounting Code
Service Tax 00440225
Interest
00440226
Penalty 00441371
 
DEFINITION:

According to Section 65 (105) (zzb), any service provided or to be provided to a client, by any person in relation to business auxiliary service is a ‘taxable service’.

According to Section 65 (19), ‘business auxiliary service’ means any service in relation to-

(i) Promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to the client; or

(ii) Promotion or marketing of service provided by the client; or

(iii) Any customer care service provided on behalf of the client; or

(iv) Procurement of goods or services, which are inputs for the client; or

Explanation.— For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that for the purposes of this sub-clause, “inputs” means all goods or services intended for use by the client;

(v) Production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client; or

(vi) Provision of service on behalf of the client; or

(vii) A service incidental or auxiliary to any activity specified in sub-clauses (i) to (vi), such as billing, issue or collection or recovery of cheques, payments, maintenance of accounts and remittance, inventory management, evaluation or development of prospective customer or vendor, public relation services, management or supervision,

and includes services as a commission agent, but does not include any activity that amounts to “manufacture” within the meaning of clause (f) of Section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944

Explanation - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that for the purposes of this clause, —

(a) ”commission agent” means any person who acts on behalf of another person and causes sale or purchase of goods, or provision or receipt of services, for a consideration, and includes any person who, while acting on behalf of another person

(i) deals with goods or services or documents of title to such goods or services; or

(ii) collects payment of sale price of such goods or services; or

(iii) guarantees for collection or payment for such goods or services; or

(iv) undertakes any activities relating to such sale or purchase of such goods or services;

(b) “excisable goods” has the meaning assigned to it in clause (d) of section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944);

(c) “manufacture” has the meaning assigned to it in clause (f) of section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944);

 
SCOPE:
TOP

Services provided in relation to promotion or marketing of service provided by the client is leviable to Service Tax under business auxiliary service. Marketing or promotion means activities which are directed towards furtherance of sale.

Organization and selling of lotteries are globally treated as supply of service. Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 enables State Governments to organize, conduct or promote lotteries. Lottery tickets are printed by the State governments and are sold through agents or distributors. Tickets are delivered by the State Government to the distributors at a discounted price as compared to the face value of the tickets. Service provided by the distributors or agents in relation to promotion or marketing of lottery tickets are leviable to Service Tax. Lotteries fall under the category of games of chance. Games of chance are known under various names like lottery, lotto, bingo etc. and are also conducted through internet or other electronic networks.

Activities relating to procurement of inputs, production of goods (not amounting to manufacture) or provision of services on behalf of a client is included in Business Auxiliary Service. Thus, the procurements of input, capital goods or input services as defined in the CENVAT Credit Rules, by any person for a client i.e. a person producing goods or providing services would be now taxable under this category. Explanation to Section 65(19)(iv) “inputs” means all goods or services intended for use by the client. Thus, it has very wide scope for levying Service Tax.

Commission agent: As per the definition of Business Auxiliary services, services as commission agent are considered Business Auxiliary services. Commission person who acts on behalf of another person and causes sale or purchase of goods, or provision or receipt of services, for a consideration, and includes any person who, while acting on behalf of another person (i) deals with goods or services or documents of title to such goods or services; or (ii) collects payment of sale price of such goods or services; or (iii) guarantees for collection or payment for such goods or services; or (iv) undertakes any activities relating to such sale or purchase of such goods or services.

As regards the question whether Insurance agents, Clearing and Forwarding agents working on commission basis fall under the definition of business auxiliary service, it is clarified that they do not, as they are specifically covered within the definition of other specified taxable services, namely the Insurance service and Clearing and Forwarding Service respectively. Under Section 65A of Finance Act 1994, it has also been provided that in case of overlap, a service would be classified under the head, (a) which provides most specific description, (b) in case of a composite service having combination of different taxable services, the service which give them their essential character and (c) in case the test of (a) and (b) does not resolve, the service which comes earlier in the clauses of Section 65, i.e. the service that was subjected to Service Tax earlier. Since, Insurance services and Clearing and Forwarding Services are more specific description and were also subjected to Service Tax prior to imposition of tax on business auxiliary service, the insurance agents, Clearing and Forwarding agents working on commission basis would fall under those respective categories. From this, it follows that a particular service can be taxed only under one head of service.

It is not possible to give an exhaustive list of business auxiliary services, the following are illustrations of services that are covered under this category viz. evaluation of prospective customers, processing of purchase orders, customer management, information and tracking of delivery schedules, accounting and processing of transactions, operational assistance for marketing, formulation of customer service and pricing policies, managing distribution & logistics. The services provided in relation to getting a customer, verification of prospective customer, processing of purchase order etc would also be covered under Service Tax.

Service Tax on Job Work:

The activity of production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client either amounts to manufacture or it amounts to Job work. According to Section 65 (19) business auxiliary services does not include any activity that amounts to manufacture. This exclusion is given to avoid double taxation on same product. Manufacture attracts levy of Excise duty, thus the production or process which does amount to manufacture is excluded from levy of Service Tax.

Manufacture has been defined u/s 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944.
Manufacture” includes any process, -

(i) incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product;

(ii) which is specified in relation to any goods in the Section or Chapter notes of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) as amounting to manufacture; or

(iii) which, in relation to the goods specified in the Third Schedule, involves packing or repacking of such goods in a unit container or labeling or re-labeling of containers including the declaration or alteration of retail sale price on it or adoption of any other treatment on the goods to render the product marketable to the consumer. “manufacturer” shall be construed accordingly and shall include not only a person who employs hired labour in the production or manufacture of excisable goods, but also any person who engages in their production or manufacture on his own account;

The definition of Job Worker is given in CENVAT Credit Rules 2004.
According to Rule 2(n) of the said rules, "job work" means processing or working upon of raw material or semi-finished goods supplied to the job worker, so as to complete a part or whole of the process resulting in the manufacture or finishing of an article or any operation which is essential for aforesaid process and the expression "job worker" shall be construed accordingly. In common parlance “Job worker” is a person who is engaged in the production or manufacture of excisable goods on account of other person.

Previously Job Workers used to claim that any process performed by them is not a manufacture to avoid levy of Excise Duty, but now, production of goods on behalf of the client is leviable to Service Tax under ‘Business Auxiliary Service’ if such production activity does not amount to manufacture. So, if process amounts to manufacture the duty of Excise will be levied and if it does not amount to manufacture the Service Tax can be levied.

Position from 01-03-2005

Notification 8/2005-ST dated 01-03-2005 exempts the taxable service of production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client, from Service Tax. Exemption can be availed only if (a) goods are produced using raw materials or semi-finished goods supplied by the client and goods so produced are returned back to the said client (b) for use in or in relation to manufacture of any goods falling under the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, (c) on which appropriate duty of excise is payable.

Explanation – (1) Production or processing of goods does not amount to manufacture as defined in 2(f) of Central Excise Act 1944 (2)“appropriate duty of excise” shall not include ‘Nil’ rate of duty or duty of excise wholly exempt.

 
SERVICE TAX EXEMPTIONS:
TOP

(a)  Small service providers whose aggregate value of taxable services rendered in the previous year has not exceeded the limit of Rs. 10,00,000/-  (Service Tax Notification No. 08/2008-S.T., dated 01.03.2008)

(b)  Services provided to the United Nations or International Organisations

(c)  Services provided to Special Economic Zones (SEZ) units (including unit under construction) and SEZ developers

(d)  Services which are exported as per ‘Export of Services’ Rules

(e)  Services provided for official or personal use of foreign diplomatic missions and family members of diplomatic missions.

(f)  Services provided by Reserve Bank of India

(g)  Out of total value of service provided proportionate value of goods and material provided by the Service Provider

 
SERVICE SPECIFIC EXEMPTION:

1. Services in relation to agriculture, printing, textile processing or education which consisted of

a) procurement of goods or services, which are inputs for the client; or

b) production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client; or

c) provision of service on behalf of the client; or

d) service incidental or auxiliary to any activity specified in sub-clauses (a) to (c) were exempted whether provided by a company, cooperative society or a partnership firm.

2. Abatement of 30% is available when Business Auxiliary Service is provided in relation to production or processing of parts and accessories used in the manufacture of cycles, cycle rickshaws and hand-operated sewing machines, for, or on behalf of, the client subject to the condition that gross amount charged from the client is inclusive of the cost of inputs and input services, whether or not supplied by the client. Thus, effective rate of duty will be charged on 70% of taxable value.

3. Taxable service provided by a person, having his place of business, fixed establishment, permanent address or usual place of residence, in a country other than India, and which is received by a hotel located in India, in relation to booking of an accommodation in the said hotel, for a customer, who has his place of business, fixed establishment, permanent address or usual place of residence, in a country other than India, is exempt from the whole of the Service Tax. Here, expression "hotel" means a place that provides boarding and lodging facilities to public on commercial basis.

4. Processes outsourced in gem and jewellery sector which amount to 'manufacture' within the scope of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 would not be liable to Service Tax. As production of goods on behalf of the client is leviable to Service Tax under 'Business Auxiliary Service' only if such production activity does not amount to manufacture.

 
CLARIFICATION:
TOP
ISSUE 1: Whether commission received by distributors for distribution of mutual fund units is liable to Service Tax under Business Auxiliary Service?

ANSWER 1: Distributors receive commission from mutual fund for providing services relating to purchase and sale of Mutual fund units. Services provided by such distributors are in the nature of commission agent and are, thus, liable to Service Tax under Business Auxiliary Service [section 65(105)(zzb)].

ISSUE 2: Persons / agencies canvass advertisements for publishing, on commission basis. Such persons / agencies do not provide any other services like making, preparation, display or exhibition of advertisement. Whether merely canvassing advertisement for publishing on a commission basis by persons / agencies is classifiable as Advertising Agency service [section 65(105)(e)] or not?

ANSWER 2: Merely canvassing advertisements for publishing, on commission basis, is not classifiable under the taxable service falling under section 65(105)(e). Such services are liable to Service Tax under Business Auxiliary Service [section 65(105)(zzb)].
 
RELEVANT SERVICE TAX NOTIFICATIONS:
TOP
Service Tax Notification No. 13/2010-S.T., dated 27-02-2010
Service Tax Notification No. 11/2010-S.T., dated 27-02-2010
Service Tax Notification No. 43/2009-S.T., dated 02-12-2009
Service Tax Notification No. 42/2009.S.T., daled 12-11-2009
Service Tax Notification No. 39/2009-S.T.,dated 23-09-2009
Service Tax Notification No. 32/2009-S.T., dated 01-09-2009
Service Tax Notification No. 03/2009-S.T., dated 15-01-2009
Service Tax Notification No. 01/2009-S.T., dated  05-01-2009
Service Tax Notification No. 14/2008-S.T., dated 01-03-2008 Exemption Notification
Service Tax Notification No. 23/2006-S.T., dated 02-06-2006, (w.e.f 01-05-2006)
Service Tax Notification No. 19/2006-S.T., dated 25-04-2006 Exemption Notification
Service Tax Notification No. 19/2005-S.T., dated 07-06-2005, (w.e.f 16-06-2005)
Service Tax Notification No. 25/2004-S.T., dated 10-09-2004
Service Tax Notification No. 08/2004-ST., dated 09-07-2004
Service Tax Notification No. 13/2003-S.T., dated 20-06-2003
Service Tax Notification No. 08/2001-S.T., dated 09-07-2001
 
RELEVANT SERVICE TAX CIRCULARS/INSTRUCTIONS/TRADE NOTICES:
Service Tax Circular No. 2305/Commr-S.T., dated 15-07-2011
Service Tax Circular No.137/06/2011-S.T., dated 20-04-2011
Service Tax CBEC Circular No. 131/13/2010-S.T., dated 07-12-2010 Clarification regarding levy of Service Tax on hire charges collected on installation of electricity meter
Service Tax CBEC Circular No. 121/3/2010-S.T., dated 26-04-2010 Clarification on service taxability of Container Detention Charges
Service Tax CBEC Circular 120(a)/2/2010-S.T., dated 16-04-2010 Clarification on taxability of amount deducted by insurance company from reinsurance premium
Service Tax CBEC Instruction letter F. No.334/1/2010-TRU, dated , 26-02-2010 Clarification regarding the changes made by the Finance Bill 2010 including the purpose and scope of amendment made to the definition of BAS
Service Tax CBEC Instruction letter F.No.332/17/2009-TRU, dated 30-10-2009 Clarification regarding value of taxable service in relation to manufacture of alcoholic beverage on job work basis
Service Tax CBEC Instruction Letter F.No.332/3/2009- TRU, dated 05-08-2009 Clarification regarding service tax on manufacture of alcoholic beverages on job work basis
Service Tax CBEC Circular No. 111/05/2009-S.T., dated 24-02-2009 Clarification regarding export criteria of some of the services
Service Tax Circular No.115/09/2009-S.T., date 31-07-2009
Service Tax CBEC Instruction Letter F. No. 332/41/2008-TRU, dated 19-12-2008
Service Tax CBEC Instruction Letter Dy.No.324/Comm Service Tax 2008, dated 01-12-2008 Clarification regarding taxability of Director's commission
Service Tax CBEC Instruction Letter (F. No. 137/92/2008-CX.4), dated 29-07-2008 Clarification stating that contract hatching of eggs not chargeable to tax under business auxiliary service
Service Tax CBEC Instruction Letter (F. No. 334/1/2008), dated 29-02-2008 Clarification on rationale of change in the definition from "to client" to '' to any person"
Service Tax CBEC Letter Dy. No. 42/Comm-S.T/2008, dated 08-02-2008 Instructions to field formations to examine applicability of service tax in respect to business auxiliary services provided by the Indian Cricket League (ICL), the Indian Premier League (IPL) and movie and sports stars
Service Tax CBEC Instruction Letter F.No.137/26/2007-CX-4 dated 15-12-2008 Clarification regarding taxability of commission received by various banks against government business transaction and in r/o god owns let out on rental basis to private parties
Service Tax D.O. F. No. 334/1/2008-TRU, dated 29-02-2008
Service Tax Relevant para of Circular No. 96/7/2007-S.T., F.No.354/28/2007-TRU, dated 23-08-2007
DGST Order F. No. V/DGST/21-30/Legal04/2004 dated 13-12-2005
Service Tax Circular No. Letter F.No. B1/6/2005-TRU dated 27-07-2005 Budget 2005-06 changes
Service Tax MF (DR) Letter F. No. 341/13/2005-TRU, dated 12-05-2005
Service Tax Circular F. No. 80/10/2004 S.T., dated 17-09-2004
Service Tax Circular No. 59/8/2003, dated 20-06-2003
 
A-B> <C-D> <E-H> <I-M> <N-R> <S-S> <T-Z>

Case Laws Related

  • STO 2014 CESTAT 57
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services' during 01/04/2005 to 31/03/2010: Activity of 'Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service (ECIS): Scope and liability: For disputing the valuation of BAS concluded in the adjudication order, it is contended that the gross value considered by the adjudicating authority is on the basis of the profit & loss account and balance sheet which were maintained on accrual basis and that the actual amount received which would be the gross consideration received and taxable, is substantially lower. Since prima facie the case is not in favour of the petitioner on the aspect of classification of the services provided (as BAS), on which tax liability is assessed, grant waiver of predeposit can not be considered. However petitioner shall be liable to pay the service tax as assessed for BAS, after taking credit for any amounts already remitted towards BAS provided during 2004-05 to March 2010.(Para 3). The adjudicating authority, erred in categorizing the service element of transactions as ECIS. If the petitioner had provided services to its customers by way of installation of the electronic goods sold by it and the expenditure incurred thereby any other amounts was reimbursed by the principal manufacturers, the services may amount to BAS provided by the petitioner to the manufacturers of the goods but not ECIS. There is a strong prima facie case in favour of the petitioner on the demand attributed to ECIS.(Para 5).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2014 CESTAT 6
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary services/ Money transfer services worldwide: Service tax on the commission received: Scope and liability: The issue involved in this case stands decided by the Tribunal in the case of Paul Merchant Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh reported in STO 2012 CESTAT 1047 wherein it has been held that the services provided by the sub-agents of the Western Union is an export of service and no service tax would be attracted. In view of this, the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order upholding the service tax demand alongwith interest and penalty under Section 78 is not sustainable.(Para 3).

    Revenue appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1589
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Manpower Supply Service: Demand: the applicant had been lending some of its employees to Megatop and the applicants are only receiving reimbursement of the expenses spent towards Salary etc: Prima facie case for waiver not found: Directions issued for pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1463
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Activity undertaken by the appellant is a part of manufacturing process and the principal manufacturer was paying duty on the goods processed by the appellant.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1294
  • Business Auxiliary Service: To arrange for finance and granting of loans to provides certain services relating to the granting of loans, for and on behalf of the bank and for these activities the assessee is receiving commission, hence is liable to service tax under the "Business Auxiliary Service,"

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1510
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service during June 2003 to February 2006: Letting out immovable properties to run Cafe Coffee Day: Scope and liability: Even though the agreement is termed as "Franchise Agreement", it is essential an agreement relating to letting out immoveable property for running outlet of "Cafe Coffee Day". Further as the properties are being taken to run Cafe Coffee Day, certain conditions have been enumerated so as to ensure the smooth functioning of outlets on day to day basis and cooperation by Appellants in this regard. Appellants have also been obliged to help M/s. ABCTCL, in taking necessary clearance from the Co-operative Housing Societies, Local bodies etc. However, beyond that appellants have no role for day to day running of the outlets. Appellants have not done any activity relating to promoting or marketing or sale or goods produced or provided by, belonging to the client. There is no any auxiliary service relating to any of the clauses mentioned in the definition or service of the type enumerated in the last clause of the definition has been provided by the appellants. Revenue's contention that the service provided by the appellants are covered under Business Auxiliary Service is not acceptable. (Para 6,8,9).

    Appeals allowed.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1234
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Applicants are providing service to the Jharkhand State Electricity Board, which comprises meter reading, preparation of monthly energy bill, delivery of the bills to customers, preparation and supply of consumer ledger etc., which, prima-facie, fall under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service": Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1248
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Applicants are promoting products manufactured by M/s. Elektroschmelzwerk Kempten GmbH, Munich, Germany in India: In similar circumstances, in Eldyne Electro Systems Pvt. Ltd., after analyzing the principle of law laid down by this Tribunal in Mapal India Pvt. Ltd. and also taking the Board Circular No.111/5/2009-ST dated-24/2/2009 Tribunal granted waiver to the applicant. Following the said precedent decision, recovery stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1596
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission received by appellants not covered for tax: Notification No.13/2003-S.T covers.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1189
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: As a Public Sector Undertaking, the assessee ought to have been a role model to other assesses, in the matter of providing full and frank disclosure of all the relevant transactions and material, called for by Revenue. Whether the appellant is liable to service tax for having provided BAS to other corporate entities; and whether services so provided fall within BAS, cannot be dependent upon the accident of the appellant's grace in choosing to respond to requisition of information by lawful authority, in this case the Revenue arm of the federal Government: Matter remanded.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1240
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Cargo Handling: Demand: Stay: According to the department, since the goods were cargo, the service falls outside "goods transport" and since the activity involved handling of cargo meant for export, was outside the purview of cargo handling, in view of the exclutionery clause in Section 65 (23): Whether the transportation was of goods meant for export in the containers, requires further examination at the hearing of the appeal: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1141
  • Business Auxiliary Services: Demand: Stay: If the petitioner was providing the anti-corrosion treatment for its own material, there would be no question of a taxable service having been provided, since service to oneself is not a taxable service: Pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1502
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary service: The petitioner, exported rice, sesame, seeds cashew nuts etc. Admittedly, processing of these commodities was not done by the cultivator of these agricultural produce but by third party agencies. Whether in the circumstances, the benefit of Notification No.8/2004-ST would apply is the issue. The exemption Notification squarely applies. By Notification No.13/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 the Central Government exempted Business Auxiliary Service provided by commission agents from the liability to service tax leviable thereon. The "Explanation" to this Notification defines 'Commission Agent" meaning a person who causes sale or purchase of goods, on behalf of another person for a consideration which is based on the quantum of such sale or purchase. The overseas agents who facilitate sale of the petitioner's export of agricultural commodities fall within the scope of commission agent defined under Notification No.13/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 Notification No.8/2004-ST amended several earlier exemption Notifications including Notification No.13/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 Under the earlier Notification No.13/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003, business auxiliary service provided by commission agents was exempted from the liability to tax. By Notification No. 8/2004-ST, the exemption was restricted to business auxiliary service provided by commission agents in relation to sale or purchase of agricultural produce. Clause (ii) appended to the existing Explanation (added by the amendment) defines 'agricultural produce'. A TRU clarification issued in Circular No.143/12/2011-ST dated 26.5.2011 clarified that where commission agents stationed abroad provide business auxiliary service to promote export of rice, said business auxiliary service is covered by Notification No.13/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 (as amended) because, 'rice' is mentioned under the Explanation to the term 'agricultural produce', in the inclusive portion along with other items like cereals, pulses, etc. The conclusion by the adjudicating authority that commission paid by the petitioner to its overseas agents for facilitating export of rice, sesame seeds, cashew nuts etc. is not entitled to the benefit of exemption Notification No. 8/2004-ST, is unsustainable. (Para 6,8).

    Corporate bank guarantee commission: Liability: Prima facie, such corporate guarantee constitutes a service provided by the Singapore entity to the petitioner for facilitating its business for procurement of indigenous agricultural produce etc. for the purpose of its export. The Singapore corporate entity was neither a Bank nor had provided a bank guarantee. It provided a guarantee on the basis of its own resources/assets to Indian banks to facilitate lending of money by Indian banks to the petitioner. This would not, constitute bank guarantee within the meaning of the said expression in Section 65(12) of the Act. corporate guarantee provided to a bank for loans taken by another entity falls within Section 65(12) of the Act and not under BSS as defined in Section 65(104)(c). (Para 9,11).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1251
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of BSNL Sim Cards: On the same issue in the case of the same applicants earlier directions given for partial pre deposit: Accordingly, directions for partial pre deposit made.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1188
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Production or Processing of Goods on behalf of the client: The goods after processing are returned to the original raw materials supplied by DSP and the finished product produced from the processed raw materials are cleared on payment of duty, is also not in dispute: Conditions of Notification 8/2005-ST dated 1.3.2005 as amended, are satisfied: Pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1187
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Prior to 16.06.2005 production or processing of goods on behalf of the client was not taxable: Pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1271
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants contention that the activity carried out by them amounts to manufacture: Also two show cause notices issued invoking larger period: Appellants already paid substantial amount in respect of first show cause notice: Pre deposit waived for balance amounts.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1262
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Adjudicating authority has clearly recorded that ERP system is related to software networking and is liable to be charged with effect from 16.5.2008 and there is no finding of the first appellate authority on this Point: Matter remanded to Commissioner (A).

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 910
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Respondents is arranging loans from various financial institutions like LIC Housing, IDBI Bank and HDFC Bank. They are procuring customers for these institutions and get the loan sanctioned to these customers and in lieu of this service they receive the Commission from these institutions and this way they are promoting or marketing the services of these institution and are squarely covered under clause (ii) of definition of Business Auxiliary Service: Confirmation of demand, interest and penalty under Section 76 & 77 set aside.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 777
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Advertisement and sale promotion by agent/ sub-agent is to be treated as export of the service and therefore no liable to the service tax: Revenue’s appeal rejected.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 919
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Show Cause Notice: Show cause notices were issued on the basis of a prima facie assumption by Revenue that the assessee was assessable to levy of service tax for providing BAS: Reasons however not specified in the show cause notices: Mere extraction of the entire provisions of Section 65(19) of the Act does not fulfill the requirement.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1022
  • Air Travel Agent or Business Auxiliary Service: Commission received by appellant from IATA: Held: Classification of the services rendered by the sub-broker or sub-agent remains the same as that of main broker: Revenue’s appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 975
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Reimbursible Expenses: As per judgment of Delhi High Court Rule 5(1) of the Valuation Rules held ultravires of Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994: Stay granted.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 955
  • Mining Service: Business Auxiliary Service: Washing of coal whether falls under Mining Service or BAS: Non speaking order: Matter remanded.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1031
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Whether the Cenvat credit could be availed in respect of inputs received prior to registration, is an issue which has to be appropriately considered at the final hearing of the appeal: Prima facie not persuaded with the petitioner's claim for immunity under Section 73 (3) of the Act: Directions issued for pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 728
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission earned on sale of mutual funds: Board’s Circular says mutual funds are not goods and hence exemption under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T not available: Andhra Pradesh High Court struck down Board’s Circular and the said judgment still prevailing as not stayed by the higher court: Revenue appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 724
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants rendered promotion of business of services and not goods, hence, not covered under any exemption clause: The service is not falling under the definition of Information & Technology service.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1137
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: incentive received by the applicant from M/s Amadeus prima facie, we are of the view that by usage of this software, the business of M/s Amadeus is Promoted: Pre deposit ordered.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1099
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Cricket: Demand: Stay: Dominant intention of both the parties in the agreement appears to be that the player has to play cricket and wear the logo and other things but the main objection of agreement is to ensure that the appellant played as per the requirement of franchisees: Pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 769
  • Commission: Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: the activities of the applicant in the present case are rendering service on behalf of the members in their business, and earned commission, which would not come within the purview of normal course of activities of club or association: directions for partial pre deposit issued.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 611
  • Commission Agent who Procures orders would be Covered Under: 'Business Auxiliary Services' and not under 'C&F Agent's Services'.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 575
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Business Support Service: Activity of charging Carriage Fees is covered under Business Auxiliary Service: BSS not discussed as it was not in existence at the material time.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1117
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax on servicing/repair of 'Power Tillers' manufactured by M/s VST Tillers and Tractors (P) Ltd. during the warranty period and whether the power tillers (cleared by the assessee) manufactured by the assessee are also liable to service tax under the category "Business Auxiliary Service": whether service provided by the appellant can be considered as service provided by 'authorized service station' has not been considered: Pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 791
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Service of commission agent abroad for sale promotion activities: Taxability under reverse charge mechanism applicable.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 529
  • "Business Auxiliary Service": Demand: Stay: Relationship between the appellant and the Bank on principal to principal basis and it was not a agency relationship as is specifically stated in the agreement. In view of the specific provisions in the agreements pertaining to the transaction, it is very clear that the appellant was not acting as a pure agent. Therefore, the liability to pay service tax on the payouts for data confirmation was squarely on the appellant: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1087
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Refund: Whether the appellant can be compelled to avail unconditional exemption available for 'Business Auxiliary Service' (BAS) rendered to printing industry: Entire service is exported and there is no domestic consumption of the service rendered by the appellant: In the absence of a provision similar to the provision under Section 5A(1A) of the Central Excise Act 1944 according to which the unconditional exemption has to be necessarily availed, such a condition cannot be enforced in respect of service tax.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 472
  • Brand Promotion Service: Business Auxiliary Service : Period 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2011: No income received by appellant during the period: Board Circular states Brand Promotion taxable from 2010: Pre deposit waived. 

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 555
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Harvesting of sugarcane and transportation of the same to the sugar factory: To undertake that work they have entered into an agreement with the contractors who have provided the manpower for harvesting of the sugarcane and transportation of the same: In any service activity, manpower is required. That does not make the service as supply of manpower. Otherwise, all services would have to be classified as "manpower supply service",

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 1086
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Processing of tobacco leaves: Tobacco leaves undergo process to make that soft and stem therefrom is separated for further procession. When the whole leave processed that finally goes for drying process. In terms of Notification No. 14/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004 it was clarified that processing of above goods is in relation to agriculture shall be exempted from the purview of service tax: Waiver from pre deposit ordered.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 623
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Discount is not commission.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 448
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Clearing & Forwarding Agent: No reasons given in the Order for classifying the service under a particular category: Matter remanded.
     

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 570
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Within the framework of the agreements, considered in the context of the taxable BAS, as defined in Sections 65 (19) read with 65(105) (zzb) of the Act, the conclusion is uncontestable that the appellant was rendering the taxable BAS since the appellant was clearly marketing and providing services in relation to sale of goods (IMFL, Beer etc.) produced/belonging to the distilleries and was not actually selling the goods because the ownership of the goods remained with the manufacturer/distillery and did not at any stage pass on to the appellant.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 602
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Market Agency Service: When a number of services are rendered, for the purpose of classification, the principal service which gives the essential character to the service has to be seen: From the documentary evidence available on record, the essential character of the service is that of a Del Credere Agent which is classifiable under Business Auxiliary Service.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 391
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Activity of sale and purchase: VAT/sales tax paid: To constitute 'Business Auxiliary Service' as defined in Section 65(19) read with Section 65(105)(zzb) the service provider shall provide service to his client for marketing or promotion of the goods to a third party: Appellants themselves are buying the goods from M/s. MGL. Therefore, the question of rendering the service to their client for marketing of their goods does not arise: Appellant is discharging VAT/Sales tax liability both at the time of purchase as also at the time of sale: Documents available on record, prima facie, indicate the transaction to be one of sale and not of service: Stay granted.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 789
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission paid for sale promotion admissible as input service: Appellants themselves eligible for cenvat credit, a case of revenue neutraility.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 645
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Trading Activity: Perusal of the import documents as well as invoices showed that the transaction of high-sea-purchase & sale is one of trading or sale. The mark-up/trade margin charged by the appellant is also subject to customs duty as part of the transaction value. If that be so, there is no reason why the same part of the transaction value should be taken out of the customs transaction and subjected to Service Tax under the guise of Business Auxiliary Services.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 425
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Reimbursible expenses made by employees towards traveling, etc while working for M/s Pidilite Industries: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 501
  • Business Auxiliary Service: When the word 'processing' was included in the definition only with effect from 16.06.2005, it is not legal on part on revenue to demand the service tax on the activity of grinding (which is held to be a processing by the lower authority) prior to 16.06.2005.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 412
  • Business Auxiliary Service: C&F Agent service: Respondents are marketing agents and the duties included circulation of product information brochures, collection of data from the market, receiving deposits/payments from the customers and launching marketing schemes to push the sales of the principal. There was no physical receipt of storage or forwarding of the goods to the customers by the marketing agents: Respondent did not perform the functions of clearing & forwarding of goods and the activity undertaken by them are classifiable under 'Business Auxiliary Service' and not under C&F Agents Service: Departmental appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 335
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Support Services for Business: At the first blush but on deeper analysis of the transaction considered as a whole and on an inter active analysis of the several terms and conditions of the agreement, duly considering the raft of obligations to be executed by the assessee under the terms and conditions of the agreement; the percentage of allocation of the total consideration to the activity of processing of bills, the activity of software development, master file creation and software maintenance and the general tenor of the contractual obligations of the assessee and considered in the light of core expectations from the agreement, the assessee was required to perform business auxiliary services and not support of business or commerce service (which came later) or information technology service.(an excluded component of BAS).

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 344
  • Business Auxiliary Service: By Notification No. 13/2003 dated 20.05.2003, issued under Section 93 of the Act, "commission agency" was exempted from levy of service tax w.e.f 01.07.2003 upto 09.09.2004.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 231
  • Business Auxiliary Service: invoice clearly shows that VAT liability has been discharged which indicates the sales of wire harness by Tyco Electronics Corporation India (P) Ltd. to the appellants. Appellant also issued an export invoice to the foreign buyer to realise the export proceeds: Documents on records clearly evidence that the transaction involved purchase and sale of goods on a principal to principal basis and not as an agent of anybody else: Demand set aside.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 828
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Appellant failed to make out a prima facie case against the demand of service tax raised under "business auxiliary service”, amounting to over Rs.4 crores. As a matter of fact, the crucial findings recorded by the Commissioner on the basis of the terms and conditions of the dealership agreement have not been specifically challenged in the appeal, apart from an observation of the appellant to the effect that the findings are based on presumptions and assumptions: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 671
  • Business Auxiliary Service: In a context relating to Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, that retreading of tyres did not amount to "manufacturing process"

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 417
  • Incentive: Business Auxiliary Service: Incentive for selling cars is a trade discount, not liable to service tax.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 305
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Factually assessee has been not only promoting or procuring orders but was also doing demonstration, installation and training the customers in India for the use of machinery as supplied by the foreign manufacturer: Waiver granted.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 368
  • Business Support Service: Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants sharing the expenses of employees with the Group companies on actual basis: After May, 2006 they started paying service tax on this activity under BSS: Commissioner ordering classification under BAS without any giving specific findings: Matter remanded.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 237
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: On the margins involved in selling of cargo space: Sale of cargo space is not sale of goods but supply of service. The consideration for the service is the margin involved in the purchase and sale of space and accordingly, service tax is leviable on the said activity: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 358
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Electroplating of connector Components: Process amounts to manufacture: Excluded from purview of BAS: Even if it is considered that the process does not amount to manufacture, the benefit of exemption under Notification No.8/2005-ST admissible as the exemption is conditional.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 219
  • Commission Agent: Notification No. 18/2009-S.T.: Exemption for services of commission agent obtained abroad by manufacturer: Procedure not followed: Declaration not filed, return not filed: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 262
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Waste Water or any waste for dispersal per se cannot be considered as goods. Further, the Board in the Circular in the case of Bio-Medical waste had clarified that incineration/shredding of bio-medical waste does not amount to processing of goods and does not make transaction taxable under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Services' or any other taxable services as in existence: Stay granted.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 242
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Consideration to the foreign service providers for obtaining FCCB and ECBs: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 238
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Support Service for Business: As per the agreement, the concessionaire has to insure the goods kept for display and sale on their own account and has to design/ decorate the display counters and should pay for their own telephone connections, the concessionaires use the Retail Store facility of the appellant which includes a host of common facilities such as air-conditioned and well-lit atmosphere, security and insurance for the entire building, common facility for the customers who are visiting the retail mall such as drinking water, toilet, lift/ escalator facility for easy movement, common billing and collection facilities in respect of the goods sold, and so on. Customers visit a retail mall because of the variety of goods offered for sale of reputed brands under one roof, the comfortable atmosphere for shopping, facility for small children by way of play area, etc. who accompany the parents, facility for food/beverages etc. by way of food courts, and so on. There is no denial of the fact it is because of these facilities, customers are attracted to Retail Malls. All these come under the category of infrastructural facilities. Section 65(104c) of the Finance Act, 1994 defines "support services for business or commerce" and services covered thereunder.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 275
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Service provided by the sub-agents is business auxiliary service provided to Western Union and the same has to be treated as export of service and would not be taxable in India.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 234
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Levy of Service Tax in respect of Processing Fee received from the Bank: Demand set aside.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 193
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Brand owner/appellants are not required to pay service tax as the surplus/profit earned by the CBU being in nature of profit. Therefore, as clarified by the CBEC through two Circulars, the appellants are not liable to pay service tax.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 513
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission: Tax demanded on notional basis that the appellant received commission in the month of March 2010 which is disputed by the appellant: Matter needs to be examined by the lower authority on this issue: Matter remanded back to the original authority to consider the submission of the appellant in this issue amongst other and to pass order in accordance with law.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 321
  • Management Consultancy Service: Business Auxiliary Service: Agreement showed that it was for rendering executor services and for sharing of the cost towards the same. Nothing in the said agreement relates or refers to management consultancy services to be rendered by the appellant to M/s BWIL. There is also no evidence led by the Revenue to show that the appellant gave consultancy to M/s BWIL in various field of management: Demand set aside.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 171
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Since computerised data processing is specifically excluded from the scope of BAS as per explanation thereof, the question of confirmation of demand under BAS prima facie does not arise: Bulk of data processing is done for the bank's branches situated abroad, the activity undertaken by the appellant would amount to export of service and on that account also no service tax would be payable by the appellant: Waiver granted.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 140
  • Commission: Demand: Stay: Penalty: Question was whether the appellant who is a direct selling agent and renders the services of the bank is liable to discharge service tax on the amount received as commission: Confusion prevailed at the material time: Penalty pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 303
  • Clearing & Forwarding: Business Auxiliary Service: Activities undertaken by the appellant are freight forwarding, collection of freight charges and remitting the same to the foreign principal. The said activity of freight forwarding does not come within the category of "Clearing & Forwarding Agency Services".

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 203
  • Demand: Stay: Business Auxiliary Service: Activity of packaging undertaken in respect of fertilizer would form an integral part of the manufacturing activity and cannot be viewed as a service activity, especially in the context of the packaging activity as defined in Section 65 (76b) which excludes from its scope any activity of manufacture as defined in Section 2 (f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 508
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission paid to foreign agent for procuring orders: Liability to pay tax: Already paid major amount of tax: Pre deposit for balance amounts waived.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 141
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Procurement of raw materials for group companies: Prima facie case made out for waiver.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 573
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Clearing & Forwarding Agent Service: Demand: Stay: Applicants not able to explain the meaning of term “Provision” on which they did not pay service tax for the period prior to 09.07.2004: Directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 142
  • Business Auxliiary Service: Job Work: Activities under taken by the appellant during the period April 07 to Sep 09 being a manufacturing activity carried out cannot be classifies as business support service and subjected to service tax.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 511
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Advertising Agency: Demand : Stay: there is no dispute that the applicant was carrying out the work for the advertising agency: No documents produced relating to receipt of payment for Advertising agency: Prima facie case not found in favour of appellants on merits.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 249
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission agency service rendered by the appellants in respect of sale of earth moving equipment is classifiable under "Business Auxiliary Service" and not under "Clearing and Forwarding Agency" service.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 188
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Intellectual Property Right Service: Adjudicating authority did not consider the Board’s Circular which clearly makes distinction between two services: Matter remanded back.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 474
  • Demand: Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Booking space for cargo transportation in airlines/ships: Prima facie case not found: Directions issued for pre deposit.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 65
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Whether packing activity amounts to manufacture: Packing activity in terms of sub-section 76(b) includes packaging of goods but does not include any packaging activity that amounts to ‘manufacture’ within the meaning of clause (f) of Section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1994. Section 2(f) (iii) defines ‘manufacture’ as process which involves packing or repacking of such goods in a unit container or labeling or re-labeling of containers or adoption of any other treatment on the goods to render the product marketable to the consumer: Packing is covered under definition of ‘manufacture’ and was excluded from the activity of packing liable to service tax: Stay granted. 

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 166
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants doing activity on job work for Hindustan Unilever Limited: Department alleges that activity does not amount to manufacture: Department not able to show why the activity does not amount to manufacture and why the benefit of Notification No. 8/2005-S.T. dated 01/03/2005 cannot be extended to them.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 5
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Inputs received under Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 shows that the activity undertaken was central excise activity: Since issue not examined: Matter remanded back.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 195
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Discounts and incentives received from media to the appellants is includable in the value of the services rendered by the appellants to their clients under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service".

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 236
  • Clearing & Forwarding Agent: Commission Agent: The appellant procures the orders from the stockists and forward the same to M/s VML. Further, the appellant ensures that the goods are sold at the terms and discounts specified in writing by VML from time to time. The appellants charged @ 3.7% on the net sale value. Thus, from the terms and conditions entered into by the appellant, it is clear that the appellant was acting as a commission agent by procuring the orders for the sale of the goods and not as Clearing & Forwarding Agent.

  • STO 2013 CESTAT 15
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Manufacture: Demand: Stay: No dispute as to the fact that the appellant herein had received the parts of the Barbie Dolls as well as the Hot Wheel Kits, which they assembled in the factory premises. When the goods were cleared from the appellant's factory premises, they were complete product in the form of Barbie Dolls and Hot Wheel Kits. The said activity undertaken by the appellant, prima facie, would fall under the definition of manufacture under Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944: Pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1096
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission received from BSNL for sale of SIM cards and recharge coupons: activity of purchase and sale of SIM card belonging to BSNL, where BSNL has discharged the service tax on the full value of the SIM cards, does not amount to providing business auxiliary services and confirmation of demand on the distributor for the second time is not called for.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1082
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale purchase of SIM cards, recharge coupons and top-up coupons belonging to BSNL: Demand of service tax on the distributors of BSNL is not sustainable.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1040
  • Business Auxiliary Service: After Sales Service: Prima facie covered under BAS: As per guidelines issued for granting stay, directions issued for partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 993
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commercial concern is no the criteria for levy of service tax: Larger period not invokable: Demand for normal period sustained.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1047
  • Banking & Other Financial Services: Business Auxiliary Service: Transfer of money from foreign nations to India: Western Union is getting their payment from the person remitting money abroad and hence obviously the services rendered by PML is ultimately used by the person remitting the money from abroad. Impugned service is used outside India and would qualify as export of services as per conditions laid down in Rule 3 (1) (iii) of Export of Services Rules, 2005: service was classifiable as Business Auxiliary Service prior to 01-05-2006 and as Banking and Financial Service from 01-05-2006.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1107
  • Business Auxiliary Service: GTA Service: Transportation of sugarcane: Appellant is not eligible for the benefit under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. as the activity involved herein is harvesting of sugar cane and transportation of sugar cane from the fields to sugar factory. It is not in relation to sale or procurement of sugar cane and, therefore, Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. does not appear to be applicable to the facts of the present case.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 940
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission or trade discount: Appellants having paid most part of service tax and disputing liability to pay service tax on merits: Amount deposited considered as sufficient compliance u/s 35F.

     

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1072
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants are the manufacturer of country liquor under the brand name "Pahili Dhar" which is registered trade name of the appellant themselves. The appellants are having the agreement with M/s. Talreja Trade (HUF) for marketing this liquor. Therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant are the job workers for Talreja Trade. Further, if at all any demand, of service tax could have been made, that could have been made against only Talreja Trade as they are the selling agents of the appellants.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 982
  • Business Auxiliary Servoce: Manufacture: loading and unloading of bus body or metal scrap and shifting such material from one place to another in the same factory, will not be classifiable under business auxiliary service because these activities cannot be considered as production or processing: these are also not cargo handling service.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 894
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Consequent upon merger of Indian Airlines Limited and Air India Limited services provided by IAL to AASL (Airline Allied Service Ltd) created as a subsidiary company : Stay: Looking to the financial difficulties being faced by the national carrier, stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 879
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Fabrication work viz. switch, expansion joints, cable joints etc. for the period from 2004-05, 2008-09 upto December, 2008: Directions issued for making partial pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 938
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant appointed M/s Matrix as her agent for providing service and discharging service tax: Matrix has already discharged service tax: No need to issue show cause notice.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 908
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant received commission from Fashion Suitings Pvt. Ltd.: Similar matters decided directing pre deposit of 20%: Directions for making similar pre deposit issued.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 902
  • GTA: Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Appellants paid service tax with interest before the issuance of show cause notice: Considered as sufficient for pre deposit: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 918
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant has undertaken the activity of harvesting sugarcane and its transportation to sugar factory from the fields of farmers and this activity is in relation to sale of sugarcane by farmers and purchase of sugarcane by the sugar factory and service provided of a commission agent: Exempted under Notification No. 13/2003-ST dated 20.06.2003 ST.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 1086
  • Information Technology Service: Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants provided services classifiable under IT Service and not BAS : IT service became taxable 16/5/2008: Demand set aside.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 878
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Preparation of loan documents covered: Directions issued for pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 884
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant providing space to banks & financial institutions and receiving commission in turn: Appellant under bonafide belief did not pay service tax: Immediately on being pointed out they paid service tax with interest: Bonafide proved and waiver under Section 80 exercised: Penalties set aside.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 808
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants rented two DG sets to ONGC: This cannot be considered as service covered under BAS: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 746
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant a proprietorship concern: During the relevant period there was levy of tax only on commercial concern: Hence, demand set aside.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 744
  • Business Auxiliary Service: CHA : Period prior to and post 1.6.2007: Various services provided by appellants, issues not discussed in the impugned order, nor appellants co-operated: Matter remanded.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 844
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Appellants reimbursed amounts to their group company in USA for purchase of software from Microsoft USA: No evidence that appellants group company retained any portion of amount with them: No evidence of commission paid: Prima facie payment not covered for any service rendered: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 766
  • Business Auxiliary Service: There being confusion prevailing during the material period, larger period cannot be invoked: Demand for normal period to be worked out and confirmed.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 799
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant entered into contract with ETTSA for computerization of VAT: Appellant sub-contract work of WAN to HSCL: It cannot be said that appellants procured goods for their client ETTSA: For major part of demand prima facie case found: Waiver granted from pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 911
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of SIM Cards and recharge coupons issued by BSNL: In as much as there is no dispute about the fact of payment of entire service tax by BSNL on the full value of sim cards/recharge coupons, demand of service tax on the same value again from the appellants has no merit especially because of amendment by budget of 2012.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 695
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission received for providing use of turf not covered under this category. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 644
  • Benefication of coal: It is a mining activity and for earlier period would not fall under Business Auxiliary Service: Activity of loading unloading of coal from washery is connected activity and not an independent activity, hence, not a taxable service under Cargo Handling Service.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 719
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Relation between appellants and company not on principal to principal basis which is evident from amount of commission received by them: Prima facie case for waiver not made out.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 829
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Activity of harvesting sugarcane and its transportation to sugar factory from the fields of farmers and this activity is in relation to sale of sugarcane by farmers and purchase of sugarcane by the sugar factory and service provided of a commission agent: Not covered under BAS: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 724
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Appellants selling products of the Bank. The products of the Banks were nothing but Banking services. Therefore, ex facie, the appellant was marketing the services provided by their clients, viz. banks. In other words, their activities squarely fell within the ambit of “promotion or marketing of services provided by client" which function was a part of the definition of BAS since 1.7.2003.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 692
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand confirmed under BAS for computer training courses conducted by appellants in agreement with Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation: Stay granted. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 563
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Liability on commission received from financial institutions: contention that financial institutions have already paid service tax on amount received from customers: Facts needs to be verified from double taxation point of view.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 539
  • Commission: Appellants holding General Power of Attorney of properties of sellers and sold the same to Sahara India, the difference between purchase & selling price was their commission: Contention of appellants that they were only doing trading activity not found meritorious: Directions for pre deposit issued.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 552
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of SIM Cards: Relation between appellants and Bharti Cellular is of purchaser and seller: Show Cause Notice issued much later than the date on which facts came within the knowledge of the department: Demand dropped on limitation ground.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 556
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission: Only when the user and the use of the service are located outside India, the transaction amounts to export and not otherwise.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 465
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Discount earned from print media is not taxable.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 554
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Activity not amounting to “manufacture” in respect of plastic/metalised film decided by the Supreme Court: Directions issued for pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 502
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Referal charges received by the appellants for promoting business of banks is taxable: Cum-tax benefit to be allowed: Penalty under Section 78 imposable. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 635
  • Business Auxiliary Service: No stretch imagination, payment of goodwill on transfer of business can come under the category of business auxiliary service. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 574
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: appellants were canvassing purchase orders in India for their own overseas-based parent company. It is their submission that this activity involved export of services and hence not taxable: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 517
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of SIM Cards: A trading activity and no service portion involved : Issue no more res integra: Departmental appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 458
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of SIM Card on commission basis: the activity amounts to purchase and sale of SIM cards in the open market on profit basis and as such cannot be held to be falling under the category of ‘business auxiliary service.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 497
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission: SSI exemption notification talks about sale of brand name and sale of Amway product is not service to the brand name: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 485
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Order passed only based on Wikipedia without taking into consideration any submissions of the appellant: Matter remanded back to Commissioner for passing fresh order. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 484
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Gross value received is taxable: Appellants did not receive the same amounts as shown by ICICI bank in its books of accounts as ICICI bank had made payments to customers directly out of these amounts: Stay: Waiver granted from pre deposit. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 495
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Service received from abroad prior to 18.4.2006 set aside: After 18.4.2006 the issue to be decided afresh: Matter remanded.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 352
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission received in foreign exchange from up country exempted from levy of service tax upto July, 2004.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 519
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Penalty: Appellant had confusion about levy of service tax as the entry was not clear: Penalty set aside.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 311
  • Business Auxiliary Service V/s Erection, Commissioning or Installation: Any service provided in relation to installation of electrical and electronic devices, including wirings or fittings, became taxable from 16-06-05.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 297
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants collected telephone bills on behalf of BSNL: Service tax liability not disputed, but service tax paid belatedly: Liability to pay interest cannot be disputed as interest is appendix to service tax.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 486
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of vouchers: Debatable issue: Directions issued to make pre deposit. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 569
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: In view of different views expressed by different benches: Benefit to be extended to the assessee: Prima facie case made out for waiver.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 244
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Job Work: Manufacturers have given certificates that they have paid excise duty on the goods received from appellants: Appellants purchased power for coating and raised bills in the name of manufacturer: Conditions of Notification No. 08/2005-S.T. dated 01.03.2005. fulfilled: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 433
  • Business Auxiliary Service v/s Business Support Service: Appellants collecting Passenger Service Fees from passengers on behalf of AAI: Service covered under BSS and not under BAS: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 247
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission for selling SIM Cards of Vodafone: Service tax paid immediately being pointed out and before issuance of show cause notice: Section 80 invoked for waiver of penalty under Section 78.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 207
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Sell or purchase of SIM cards: Not a service, but only trading: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 188
  • Business Auxiliary Service: activity of marketing of loan schemes from various banks, financial institution: on merits issued decided against the assessee: On limitation there were contradictory decisions, hence, larger period demand set aside.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 236
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Adjudicating authority did not examine eligibility for threshold exemption properly for the first year and for the second year the services in relation to agriculture: Matter remanded back. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 137
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Supply of labour to run HPCL retain outlet not covered under BAS: Stay granted.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 461
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Reimbursable expenses: Order beyond the scope of show cause notice: Even then category incorrectly mentioned in the SCN, if liability arises under any category it can be confirmed: Directions issued for pre deposit and matter remanded to original authority.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 102
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants rendering services to international steamer agents: Various incomes received purported to be included in valuation under BAS: No specific findings about nature of service: Stay granted: Looking to huge amount matter fixed for early hearing.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 184
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Services rendered by the appellants for recovery of dues is not covered under BAS but covered under BSS: Also the contention of appellants that income shown in the balance sheet was not fully attributable to this service for which they also produced CA certificate which is discussed in the impugned order but no findings have been given: Stay given and matter remanded. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 183
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: incentive, extra incentive, monthly target incentive, cash and carry discounts etc.received by the appellants out of extra sales of vehicles not “commission”, hence, prima facie out of BAS: Appellants deposited 25% of service tax as per directions of Commissioner (A) after their appeal was dismissed: Same to be treated as sufficient by Commissioner (A) and matter remanded for fresh decision. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 145
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Appellants have set up facilitation center for issuing birth & death certificates for which they collect some fee to be paid to Punjab Government, they also collect some charges for meeting with their expenses and reasonable profit: Service provided to Punjab Government, but Government is not paying any remuneration to appellants: Prima facie case for waiver made out.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 553
  • Business Auxiliary Service v/s Mining Service: The activity of benefication/washing of coal is a part of the mining which came into existence w.e.f. 01.06.07, hence, no tax leviable under BAS for earlier period.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 105
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission paid to overseas agent for booking orders: Under reverse charge mechanism liability to pay arises only from 18.4.2006.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 168
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: February, 2004 to April, 2006: During the material period service tax under the category of BAS was leviable on commercial concern and not on the individual.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 123
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Advertisement by manufacturers of medicines in news bulletin covered under sale of space or time for advertisement: Imposition of tax on a particular activity from a specified date would mean that the impugned activity is not taxable prior to specified date under existing entries and heads.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 107
  • Penalty: Business Auxiliary Service: Providing services to financiers: During the period in dispute there was confusion, hence, bonafide belief established: Service tax and interest not being disputed: Section 80 invoked for waiver of penalties.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 284
  • Maintenance or Repair Service v/s Business Auxiliary Service: Repairs undertaken by the appellant were in relation to the sale of machines by M/s L & T Komatsu Ltd. and, therefore, the appellant's services squarely fall within the ambit of the definition of 'Business Auxiliary Service'.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 54
  • Business Auxiliary Service: When the appellant was providing comprehensive sanitation assistance to Jaipur Municipal Corporation, it cannot be said to have provided Business Auxiliary Service.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 60
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: commission received for the services of harvesting and transportation of sugar cane to the sugar cane factory for the manufacture of sugar which is a manufacturing activity, hence, exemption under Notfn.No.14/2004-ST not admissible: Directions issued for pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 225
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants entered into agreement with foreign cricketers to play IPL matches in India: Contention of appellants that new service introduced from 1.7.2010, hence, the service was not taxable for prior period: In similar case Delhi Bench asked for 10% pre deposit : Precedent followed. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 95
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant working as sub-agent of Corporate Agent providing services as Agent and paying service tax on reverse charge mechanism: Corporate agent paid service tax on entire commission received by him and shared a part with the appellants: Prima facie case made out for waiver of pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 98
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: Stay: Appellants earning commission and discount from mutual fund companies: No evidence produced that they were getting commission/discount from MF companies: Directions for pre deposit issued. 

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 29
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Allegation that appellants getting the goods manufactured on job work basis: It was found that there is a relationship of principal and agent between the Appellant and job worker. Hence, condition of pre deposit waived.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 11
  • Demand: Business Auxiliary Service: Activities of appellants show that they were not merely commission agent, hence, benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. dated 20.6.2003 not admissible: Reimbursable expenses on actual basis towards transportation and making other facilities for principal admissible: Reimbursable expenses for salary and wages not admissible.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 281
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants collecting “royalty” at fixed percentage from HCG on their annual turnover apart from the rent for providing space: Directions to make pre deposit issued taking into consideration that the appellants is a Charitable trust and hence facing financial difficulty in making pre deposit.

  • STO 2012 CESTAT 19
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of Naptha and Furnace oil on high sea sales basis: When there is an agreement for sale and purchase of the product and element of service is absent no service tax can be charged on the services included in the value of the goods.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 336
  • Service Tax: Real Estate Agent Service" and "Business Auxiliary Services: Demand: Taxable events: 1) Mobilizing deposits under Sahara Swam and Rajat Yoina :- It is admitted fact that 10% of fund mobilised were utilised towards the purchases of immovable property. As 10% of the funds have been utilised towards purchase of immovable property, that part of the funds is covered under remuneration for "Real Estate Consultant".Therefore, prima facie the applicant is covered under the category of "Real Estate Agent Service" for 10% of the total demand of service tax under this head.(Para 8.3). 2) Land Procurement Charges:- The applicants are collecting the money on behalf of M/s SlCCL and paying the same to M/s SICCL. Since the money due to SICCL is always available with the applicant, the point at which they show certain portion as their receipts from M/s. SICCL is a matter of accounting jugglery.(Para 9.5).Prima facie, there is disagreement with the ld. advocate that the applicant have not received any amount on account of "Land Procurement Charges" and it is also not clear from the Balance Sheet. Therefore, at this stage, the demand on this account is sustainable.(Para 9.6). 3) Mobilizing applications for Sahara Debentures/Bonds:- It is established that the debentures are not "goods" within the meaning given to it in Finance Act 1994 therefore the sale, marketing or purchase of these debentures are not covered under "Business Auxiliary Services.” Therefore, demand is not sustainable.(Para 10.6) 4) Personalized Services provided to Debenture/Bond holders :- It is held that debentures are not "goods" to attract service tax under the category of "Business Auxiliary Services" as per The Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, any service related to these "debenture" is not covered under "Business Auxiliary Service". Therefore, demands under this head are also not sustainable.(Para 11) As the applicants have not disclosed the activities undertaken by them to the department, prima facie the extended period of limitation is invocable.(Para 12). Partial pre-deposit is ordered, and on compliance balance amount of service tax, interest and penalties shall remain stayed during the pendency of appeal.(Para 14). 

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 318
  • Sale of Sim Card: Business Auxiliary Service: Conditional stay granted.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 298
  • Service Tax: Commission agent service / Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: The activities so carried out in terms of the agreement was not of taxable nature during relevant period and was not expected to be taxed which is clear from para 18 of the Board's Circular No. B2/8/2004-TRU, dated 10.09.2004. When the law itself did not require the appellant to be liable. Therefore, there is no further warrant to look into suppression aspect when on merit the appeal succeeds. Consequently appeal is allowed.(Para 9). 

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 145
  • Business Auxiliary Service: No direct nexus between service provided and commission received: Partial stay granted.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 348
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant rectifying the defect in the inputs by undertaking some process and issuing debit note to the supplier of raw material for such charges  No service provided to the raw material supplier: No service tax.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 334
  • Service Tax: Service tax under the head, Business Auxiliary Service’ on the toll collected: Demand: The agreement also disclosed the intention of NHAI to enter into an agreement with CIDBI for the purpose of implementing the project and grant of concession in relation to the aforesaid Highways by way of a ‘Concession Agreement’. The Agreement stated that the proposed Concession Agreement’ would be for a period of 30 years including the construction period. It further stated that this period of 30 years would commence from the date to be specified in the ‘Concession Agreement’.(Para 3). Accordingly, under the Concession Agreement, STPL was collecting toll charges on Sections of NH-5 and NH-9 in the capacity of Concessionaire’ and not as any agent of CIDBI. Now that the very basis of the show-cause notices has collapsed the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals of the assessee are allowed. In this process, the Revenue’s appeal gets dismissed.(Para 19).

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 289
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Discount on the bills earned by appellants not at par with commission on which they paid service tax, this being only price mechanism not liable to tax as commission.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 286
  • Taxability: When there is an imposition of tax on a particular activity from a specific date, the same activity cannot be held to be falling under a different entry prior to the said date.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 266
  • Business Auxiliary Service: When goods sold directly by the Company in the territory of respondents and respondents gets commission on the amount of sales directly made by company, the respondents cannot be considered as “Commission Agent” and are not eligible for exemption under Notificationn.No.13/2003 S.T.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 308
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Income from Mutual Funds: Being considered as “goods” exemption under Notification.No 13/2003-S.T available: Prima facie case made out. Stay granted.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 344
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Cash Management Service: Collection of bills for electricity and telephone not covered under BAS.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 154
  • Service Tax: Commission on sale of sim cards, recharge coupons etc. used for mobile phones: Taxability: It is established that selling of sim cards does not attract service tax liability under the category of business auxiliary services. Condition of pre-deposit of duties and penalties waived and allow the stay petition unconditionally. (Para 3).

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 79
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Providing space to financial institutions in authorized service station: Board Circular No. 87/05/2006-S.T Dated 06.11.2006 As observed in the Board circular, there were doubts in the field as regards such activities being chargeable to service tax. The demand raised beyond the normal period of limitation against the appellant is clearly barred by limitation. Accordingly, set-aside the impugned order on the said ground and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants. (para 4)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 191
  • Service Tax: Receipt of liquor from various manufacturers who are distilleries, brewery, blending unit: Taxability: The appellant is engaged in an activity akin to trading and the activities undertaken by the appellant is nothing but a sale of liquor and cannot be held as services rendered to the distilleries.(Para 7). The impugned orders is set aside and appeals allowed.(Para 7.1).

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 124
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Commission: Pre-deposit: Prima facie, the assessees have promoted or marketed insurance mediclaim policy and therefore have rendered Business Auxiliary Service. As regards continued usage of software, the assessees have prima facie promoted the services provided by M/s. Amadeus and have therefore rendered Business Auxiliary Service. Ground arrangement/accommodation, site seeing etc. are classifiable as "Tour Operator Service". Income received from cancellation of tickets also prima facie amounts to rendering of Air Travel Agent's service. The assessees have, therefore, not made out a case for total waiver of tax. (para 2,3)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 230
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary services: Demand: Waiver of penalty: As per Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, the business auxiliary service has been defined wherein a specific sub clause (v) is introduced to bring production of goods for, or on behalf of the client within the scope of Service Tax levy. Accordingly process is an integral part of production and keeping the intention of legislation while inserting the word “production” initially in 65(19) was to levy Service Tax on this activity of production/processing. Accordingly, demand is confirmed. The issue involved in this matter is of interpretation of the statute, hence it is fit case to invoke section 80 of finance Act to waive penalty. Accordingly, penalty is waived and appeal is disposed of.(Para 7)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 89
  • Service Tax: Taxable Value: Pre-deposit: In view of the categorical finding by the Commissioner that the value of the goods supplied was not known to the service provider and the charges were made on the service receivers on the basis of percentage, appellant has not been able to make out a strong prima-facie case in their favour. The appellant should be directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 20 lakhs (para 4)

  • STO 2011 Mad 303
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Software maintenance: Service tax sought on maintenance of software received from foreign company: C.B.E. & C. Circular dated 7-10-2005 holding that software being goods, maintenance thereof liable to Service tax under Business Auxiliary Services - Information technology service specifically excluded from Business Auxiliary Services till introduction of separate service in 2007 - Maintenance of computer software covered under information technology in Business Auxiliary Services before 2007 - Term ‘goods’ defined as including computer software by Finance Act, 2007 - Amendments made in 2007 without retrospective effect - Impugned circular contrary to statutory provisions on imposition of Service tax on maintenance, repair or servicing of software during period before Finance Act, 2006 and the same declared as not applicable to petitioner - Section 65(19) of Finance Act, 1994 - Section 37B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994. [paras 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, 22]

    Petition disposed off.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 127
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Commission: Board Circular No. 87/05/2006-ST dated 6.11.2006: Penalties: In view of the recognized fact that there was doubt relating to the taxability of the service as noted by the Board circular dated 6.11.2006, the non-payment of tax by the respondents during the relevant period cannot be held to be intentional. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in setting aside the penalties imposed under Sections 77 & 78 is justified and calls for no interference.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 94
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Commission received for distribution of mutual fund units: Pre-deposit: As the main contractor has duly discharged service tax liability on the said commission, service tax is not liable to be paid by the applicants as Finance Act does not provide for double taxation of the services. Following the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of M/s. Vijay Sharma & Co., that applicant had strong primafacie case in their favour. Accordingly, waiver of entire service tax and various penalties (para 3,6)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 90
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Collection of toll tax: Pre-deposit: Collecting toll tax is a sovereign function and cannot be termed as business auxiliary service. The applicant has made out a strong prima facie case in their favour. Accordingly, waiver of entire tax, interest and penalty is allowed and its recovery stayed during pendency of the appeal. (para 4)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 33
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Cenvat Credit: No credit was taken in respect of invoice dated 30.03.05 and the differential amount of Rs. 306/- has also been paid, there was no short payment and there was no excess availment of cenvat credit. Since matter can be decided finally which both sides agree, the appeal itself is taken up for decision the impugned order is set aside in toto with consequential relief to the appellants. (para 3)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 231
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Commission: Services received from abroad: Cenvat Credit utilised for discharge of Tax under Section 66A: The appellant is deprived of making use of the Cenvat credit. Since the matter in controversy involves question of law, there may be waiver of pre-deposit during pendency of the appeal. (para 3)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 62
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Activity amounting to manufacture: Board’s Circular No. 249/1/2006-CX.4 dated 27.10.2008 : This aspect was also part of the activity of the appellant for all the periods covered by order-in-appeal dated 18.02.2009 ibid and order-in-original dated 31.12.2008 ibid, which were accepted by the department Further the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the bench in Rubicon Farmulation’s Ltd which took into account the Board’s Circular dated 27.10.2008. The circular is binding on the departmental authorities. The impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed (para 2,3)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 75
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Services received from abroad: The enabling provisions of Section 66 A of the Act, 1994 for charging of service tax from the service recipient in India, in respect of taxable services received from abroad from a person not having office or establishment in India was introduced w.e.f. 18.04.2006 and in view of this, Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Indian National Shipowners Association (supra) has held that for the period prior to 18.4.2006, the service tax liability cannot be fastened on the service recipient in India in a situation where taxable service is provided by a non-resident person not having office/establishment in India. The Revenue's appeal as well as stay application is dismissed. (para 4)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 73
  • Service Tax: Cenvat Credit : Input Services: Pre-deposit: In respect of demand relating to other services, demand arising out of credit on various services, the same are contentious and the submissions in respect of each of them have to be gone into in detail at the time of final hearing. Taking the entire facts and circumstances into account, direct the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- (para 7)

    Service Tax: Authorised service station and Business auxiliary service: Prima facie that the sale of parts and components during rendering services during warranty period cannot be treated as part of the services. Merely because these items were used in undertaking the repairs /maintenance, the same may not become part of the services undertaken. Therefore, the demand of about Rs. 1.88 crores is not, prima facie, sustainable. (para 6.1.)

    Service Tax: Authorised service station and Business auxiliary service: Incentives paid to the dealers : The incentives have a direct relationship with the value of goods so sold on which excise duty becomes payable. To treat the value as representing the value of business auxiliary services, is prima facie not correct. And therefore, the demand of about Rs.75.23 is also not, prima facie, sustainable. (para 5.2.)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 65
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: The Larger Bench judgment in the case of Maa Sharda Wine Traders Vs Union of India reported in STO 2008 MP 874 MP has held that packaging and bottling of liquor is covered by the definition of manufacture as defined in Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944 and will not attract any service tax liability. The impugned order of Commissioner is set aside and allow the appeal with consequential relief. (para 4,5)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 264
  • Information Technology Service: Appellate preparing bills on the tailor made software and handing over the bills to clients not to the customers of the clients: Before 1.5.2006 BAS definition excluded Information Technology Service, hence, not taxable.

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 60
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Show Cause not travelled beyond scope: The show cause notice only makes a statement of fact that call centre service was exempt till 1.3.06 and nowhere there is an admission that the appellant was rendering call centre service only. (para 8)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Call Centre activities: The activities of registration of complaints/monitoring of complaints, collection of payments, accounting for the same and management of accounts and complaints cannot be called as call centre activities. (para 12)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Registering of complaints and collection of bills: Once the appellants deal with the customer, he is acting on behalf of the electricity company/department and therefore classification of services provided by the appellant is appropriately to be classified under Business Auxiliary Service and not under SSBC. (para 12)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Maintenance & Repairs of software: Clarification which widens the scope of tax cannot have retrospective effect: In every case, word 'maintenance' has been used. In the absence of the word 'development' and presence of word 'maintenance' in the agreement, and also in view of the failure of the appellant to submit bifurcation, have to take a view that the agreement covers maintenance only. In view of the ratio of the decision in the case of Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd, it would not be appropriate to apply the explanation retrospectively and levy Service Tax w,e.f. 9.7,04. In any case, the very fact that explanation has been added to clarify doubts, would show that suppression of facts could not have been invoked in this case. In view of the above decision, maintenance of software became taxable only from 1.6.07. (para 14,15)

    Service Tax: Support services of business or commerce: Billing & Meter reading: When the meter reading is not done by the implementing agency, as can be seen from the contract with the respective Assistant Accounts Officers or EROs are required to provide meter reading books on the prescribed dates and the appellant is required to enter the data of meter readings, verify the same, incorporate in the computer master and process the bills, this activity is correctly classifiable under SSBC as claimed by the learned Advocate. The spot billing and HT billing is also covered in the same category. (para 17)

    Service Tax: Support services of business or commerce: Energy audit: This service is clearly covered by SSBC since it is in relation to business or commerce, which is nothing but supply of electricity and recovery of cost thereof. It is covered by "managing distribution and distribution logistics". In this case, by doing energy audit, the appellant is assisting in finding out whether all the electricity received has been sold and if not, where the problem lies. This is nothing but management of distribution and logistics of electricity supplies. Therefore, this is clearly covered under SSBC and not under Business Auxiliary Service. (para 18)

    Service Tax: Support services of business or commerce: Consumer Indexing : In this case, development of software only facilitates the consumer indexing and real work is physical in nature as observed by learned Commissioner. Back office services and other activities such as tax service, international assignment service etc. were not related to development of software. It was also observed that use of computer in these services was secondary and primary activity was that of business related work. Therefore, it is quite clear that this cannot be classified as I.T. service. The electricity companies/departments are required to know where the transformers and poles are located and consumers connected to poles/transformers to provide service or to attend to the complaint etc. This facilitates better distribution of electricity and also solves logistics problems when complaints are received. Therefore, this service is also appropriately classifiable under SSBC. (para 19,20)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Watch and Ward Route Rider service: This is a part of Electricity Call Centre, Customer Service Centre and Computerized Collection Centre and is a subsidiary activity relating to them. These services are classifiable under Business Auxiliary Service only. Therefore, this service is also correctly classifiable under Business Auxiliary Service. (para 21)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Extended period of limitation: It is a statutory obligation on the part of every service provider to see whether the service rendered by him is liable to Service Tax and make declaration to the department. There is no indication to show whether the appellant had sought clarification from the department or obtained any legal opinion as regards liability to Service Tax. There was a statutory obligation cast on the appellant to obtain registration and pay Service Tax in respect of various services. It has to be noted that even on 3.3.06, when the application was made, the appellant had not indicated all activities undertaken by them. Therefore, have to uphold the invocation of extended period. (para 22)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Penalty: The learned Commissioner has imposed penalty under Section 76 but has not quantified the same. Therefore, to this extent, the impugned order is defective. (para 23)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services:  Remand: The demand has to be re-quantified, since in some cases, the classification has been changed and in some cases, the appellant's claims have been accepted. Further, as already observed, the corrigendum was issued to amend the amount of Service Tax demanded. Further, penalty under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994, has not been quantified. For this purpose, the impugned order is required to be set aside and matter remanded to original adjudicating authority for fresh decision (para 24,25)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 11
  • Service Tax : Business Auxiliary Services : Commission received for promoting business : Pre-deposit : The Revenue was fully aware of the activities and as such, with introduction of a new services under the category of business auxiliary services with effect from 1.7.03, if the Revenue was of the opinion that the appellants activity fall under the said category, it should have either advised them to pay the service tax or should have proceeded to take action against them within normal period of limitation. There is no evidence reflecting upon any positive act of suppression or misstatement with intent to evade payment of duty by the appellant. Reflection of the income and the said activity is the ledger account and the balance sheet will reflect upon the absence of any willful suppression or mis-statement on the part of the appellant so as to invoke longer period of limitation. On this short point, allow the stay petition unconditionally. (para 3)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 2
  • Service Tax: Pre-deposit: Business Auxiliary Services: Service provided by Direct Selling Agents/Teams for promoting the marketing and business of Private Sector banks : If non-obtaining of registration can be held to be a factor for invocation of longer period, no case of demand which stand subsequently made, would be held to be barred by limitation. The appellant has a prima facie, case on time-bar. The stay petition is allowed unconditionally. (para 4)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 95
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Section 80: Penalty: There was reasonable cause for failure on the part of the assessee to clear the dues in time. The said finding cannot be said to be either perverse or not borne out from the record. In those circumstances, the discretion having been exercised by the Commissioner in favour of the assessee, in the peculiar facts of the case, do not find a case for interference with the impugned order. The very nature of the entry relating to Business Auxiliary Service and the large number of disputes that arose regarding the scope of entry clearly show that there was some confusion in the minds of prospective assesses about the scope of this entry. (para 6,9)

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 175
  • Service Tax: Busineaa auxillary services: Demand: The definition of "Business Auxiliary Services" during the period 10.9.2004 to 28.2.2005 (relevant period in the present case) was indicating about the services rendered "production of goods on behalf of the client", while the amended definition of 16.6.2005 indicated "production of goods for or on behalf of the clients". The appellant has made out a prima facie case for waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved. Application for waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of the appeal.(Para 6).

  • STO 2011 CESTAT 25
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Machining of castings carried out by the assessees on job-work basis for clients : Photographs of process : Remand : The impugned order is set aside and remand the case for fresh decision on the basis of the assessee's explanation as to how their activity .of machining does not amount to manufacture. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. (para 2,3)

  • STO 2011 Mad 304
  • Service Tax : Business Auxiliary Services - Commission agent - Service tax on commission for acting as agent for marketing and sale of tea overseas - Petitioner contending that Service tax not payable as tea covered as ‘agricultural produce’ and commission agent thereto exempted under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. as amended - Revenue stating tea being manufactured product, not covered under exemption meant for agricultural produce and writ petition filed before issue of show cause notice, premature - Revenue’s submission that show cause notice would be issued - Respondent directed to issue show cause notice and decide as per law after hearing petitioner - Sections 65(19) and 93 of Finance Act, 1994. [paras 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10]

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 799
  • Service Tax: 'Business Auxiliary Service' during the period 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2007 as well as "Storage and Warehousing": Activity of rendering various services to promote sale of liquor owned by the suppliers: Scope and liability: There is no dispute that the impugned activities are undertaken by the Corporation with the sole object of promoting sale of liquor manufactured by various distilleries in Kerala. However, these activities would assume the character of services exigible under the Act if the liquor received from the suppliers continued to be the property of various distilleries till its sale by the Corporation. In fine, if the Corporation takes over supplies of liquor from the various distilleries when it receives them in its warehouses on sale by the suppliers, the question of the Corporation rendering any taxable service to the distilleries in promoting the sale of liquor manufactured by the distilleries does not arise. The question is whether there is sale of liquor by the suppliers at the threshold. KSBC is an instrumentality of the state and holds the monopoly for purchase and sale of foreign liquor, beer and wine throughout the state of Kerala under licences. The activities of the Corporation are governed by the Abkari Act of the state. KSBC holds exclusive licences for selling liquor in wholesale and retail in the form of FL-9 and FL-1 licences. KSBC is assessed to sales tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and the Central Sales Tax, 1956.(Para 10,11).

    Purchases made under rate contract: The Corporation receives the goods under invoices from the distilleries in terms of the rate contracts entered into between the Corporation and the distilleries. The consideration for the goods received is made over to the suppliers within the time limit as per the schedule prescribed in the rate contract i.e. within 45 days or after the goods are sold out whichever is later or 100% of the value of actual sales in a fortnight after deducting 2% discount.(Para 16).

    The supplies received and retained in the warehouse of the Corporation are the property of the Corporation: Sale of the supplies take place on delivery of goods to the Corporation in terms of the contract. The supplies received and retained in the warehouse of the Corporation are, therefore, the property of the Corporation. Though the Corporation charges the liquor manufacturers for services rendered by it to promote the sale of liquor, these are recoveries or penalties imposed on the suppliers as per the contract. Since the sale takes place on delivery of goods under terms of contract, activities undertaken by the Corporation cannot be held to be services rendered to somebody else and, therefore, exigible to Service tax. Clauses in the rate contract govern the consideration determined and exchanged. The relevant conditions are mutually agreed prior to supply of the goods.

    Sales Tax is levied on the first sale by the appellants: As per Section 5(2C) of the KGST Act, sales tax is levied on the first sale by the appellant. This statutory requirement does not make the transfer of liquor by the distilleries to the Corporation, a transaction not constituting sale. The impugned services are rendered to promote sale of goods belonging to the appellant itself and not of the suppliers, these do not constitute Business Auxiliary Service on which the Corporation has to pay tax-As the Corporation owned the goods on delivery by the suppliers, it could not have rendered any service including storage and warehousing in respect of those goods to another person. Therefore, the impugned demand and penalties are not sustainable. (Para 17,18,19).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 572
  • Brand promotion: The appellants are justified in contending that the entry relating to brand promotion under Section 65(105)(zzzzq) was introduced w.e.f. 26.02.2010. This obviously shows that the brand promotion was not included in the category of business auxiliary services prior to the said date.

    Introduction of new Service: It is settled law that the charge created by introducing a new entry and consequently taxability thereupon, the question of imposing the duty retrospectively does not arise. The statutory provision did not provide brand promotion to be a taxable service during the relevant period. It is not for this Tribunal to deal with the issue as to whether display of logo would fall in this category or not.

    Burden of Proof: It was for the department to establish the positive effects of display of logo and it was not for the assessee to prove the negative. The burden to establish the charge was squarely upon the department which it failed to discharge.

    Beyond the scope of the show cause notice: The adjudicating authority, for the reasons disclosed herein above, did travel beyond the scope of the show cause notice while deciding the matter.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 675
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Application for stay on operation of order: Commission received from finance companies : This issue is settled by the Tribunal in favour of the respondents in the case of Popular Vehicles & Services Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Ranchi reported in = STO 2010 CESTAT 743 whereby in the similar situation, the Tribunal held that the demand of service tax is not sustainable. In view of the above decision, prima-facie, no merit in the stay application and the same is dismissed. (para 2).

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 499
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Medicines containing alchohol though duty collected by State Government under Medicinal & Toilet Preparations Act, the process amounts to manufacture u/s 2(f), hence, outside the purview of levy of service tax.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 699
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: It is seen that apart from selling the SIM Cards of M/s. Bharti Airtel Limited they also sell the mobile phones. Absolutely no inquiry has been made with the respondents and no statement in this regard asking them about the source of the income declared to the income tax authorities has been recorded. The evidence gathered by the Department is not sufficient to establish even the preponderance of probability. (para 4)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 620
  • Service Tax: Exemption under Notification No. 14/04-ST: The benefit of exemption from the payment of Service Tax in terms of Notification No. 14/04-ST dated 10.9.2004as amended by Notification No. 19/2005 dated 7.6.2005 was denied to the assessee by the authorities below on the ground that the assessee was not engaged in providing 'Business Auxiliary Service' of textile processing. The Notification in question reads as under: -"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 93 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts taxable service provided to a client by a commercial concern in relation to the business auxiIiary service, in so far as it relates to,-(a) procurement of goods or services, which are inputs for the client;(b) production of goods on behalf of the client……;(Para 2). Since the appellant herein is an individual and procuring the goods for clients which are inputs for his client, the assessee is covered by the first part of the Notification and is, therefore, entitled to benefit of the exemption under Notification No. 14/04. Hence, the demand of Service Tax, interest and penalty is unsustainable. Appeal allowed.(Para 4). 

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 478
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant not a commercial concern, hence, not liable to pay service tax prior to May, 2006: Appellant causing sales for Aadishwar Motors and Shraddha Motors, Notification no.13/2003 exempts levy of service tax on commission agent who causes purchase or sale of goods: Matter remanded for verification of contracts.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 617
  • Business Auxiliary Service: As per Explanation (zzzm) of Section 65 (105) of the Act, sale of space for advertisement in print media is exempted from levy of service tax

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 566
  • Service Tax: Payments to Indian claimants in Indian currency for the money sent from abroad, which is collected in USA and other countries by M/s Western Union: Business auxiliary services: Scope: PML had a contractual agreement with M/s Western Union Financial Services Inc. New Jersey to make payments to Indian claimants in Indian currency for the money sent from abroad, which is collected in USA and other countries by M/s Western Union. The relation between M/s Western Union and PML is of money transfer services which is not a taxable service in India. This activity will not fall under the category of Business Auxiliary Services as they have received the Commission and they have not charged or provided any services to the Indian claimants as held in an identical issue came up before this bench in the case of Muthoot FinCorp Ltd., Vs CCE Visakhapatnam [STO 2009 CESTAT 1763]. (Para 5,6). The services rendered by the appellant of money transfer is directly to Western Union. If that be so, it can be said that the appellant is providing the services to Western Union whose beneficiaries are outside India. CBEC vide its circular No. 137/307/2007, dt. 24-2-2009 gave a clarification regarding the applicability of the provisions of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 in certain situations. the benefits of the services rendered by the appellant are accrued to a person who is situated outside India and to Western Union, who is also situated outside India.(Para 9,10).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 615
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services / Business support service: Show cause notice do not specify exact classification: No demand can be confirmed against any person towards service tax liability unless he/it is put on notice as to its exact liability under the statute. In the show-cause notice basic to the proceedings, the impugned activities were proposed to be classified under BAS and BSS. This proposal was confirmed by the Original Authority. This order is not in accordance with the law. The impugned order held that UTL provided services on behalf of the client i.e. Director, e-Seva and sustained the demand. Under BAS, there are seven sub-clauses. Demand under sub-clause (vii) could be on activities relatable to either one of the preceding six sub-clauses. Therefore, if a notice issued proposing demand under BAS, the notice will not be aware to the precise ground on which tax is proposed to be demanded from him unless the sub-clause is specified. In the instant case, service tax was proposed to be demanded for an activity under BAS and BSS. Under BSS also several activities are listed as exigible under that head. In the absence of proposal in the show-cause notice as to the liability of the assessee under the precise provision in the Act, we find the demand to be not sustainable.(Para 6). Accordingly, the demand and penalties imposed on the appellants is vacated and allow this appeal.(Para 7). 

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 561
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services / Vehicle Transportation Contract: Taxable event: Demand: From the definition of 'support services of business or commerce', it includes a particular activity "managing distribution and logistics". The activity undertaken by the appellant, fall under the category of "managing distribution and logistics" i.e. timely and safe delivery of the vehicles to the regional sales office from the factory premises, which is nothing but distribution of finished goods to the various places of the client. The logistics is transportation of the said goods from the factory to the regional sales office. (Para 9). The activities rendered by the appellant would be covered only under the category of 'business support services' and that also with effect from 01.05.2006 when specific entry was brought into taxable services under Section 65, (104C) of the Finance Act, 1994 and prior to 01.05.2006, the services rendered by the appellant would not fall under the category of 'business auxiliary services'. The impugned order is not sustainable and liable to be set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential relief.(Para 11).  

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 489
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Weighment services: Tribunal has already looked into the matter, following the judicial discipline, dismiss the appeal of Revenue upholding the first appellate order.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 463
  • Stay: Non Profit Making Organisation: Having only little funds in their bank account would cause undue financial hardship: Stay granted.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 446
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Interest charged for finance provided cannot be considered as liable to service tax under the category of business auxiliary service: Stay granted.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 450
  • Service Tax: Call center: Taxable event: Demand: Appellants are providing information of their clients to the callers/inquirers free of cost through telephone and enjoyed exemption from service tax claiming status of a call Center. As per Notification No. 08/2003-ST dated 20.06.2003, “Call Center” means “a commercial concern which provides assistance, help or information, through telephone, on behalf of another person”. The scope of “Call Center” has been further expanded vide Notification No. 12/2004-STdated 10.09.2004 and it reads as, “Call Center” Means “a Commercial concern which (a) provides assistance. Help or information; or (b) contacts customers including prospective customer, for the purpose of sales, telemarketing, payments through telephone, leased lines, satellite links, mail, fax wed chat and use of information system for monitoring and recording information on behalf of another person.(Para 4). The respondents are not acting for one party but for multiple parties and in the process, all are benefited. The primary function of the respondents is nothing but that of the Call Center. Appeals filed by the Revenue are without any merits and accordingly, reject the same.(Para 5). 

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 331
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Penalty: Being a new service and that too in the name of business auxiliary service, it is quite possible that appellant was not aware of his liability. Therefore as soon as he came to know and even before investigation started he took the registration is required to be considered as a favourable point. The appeal is allowed by setting aside the penalty under Section 76 and Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. It is made clear that penalty under Section 77 for contravention of various provisions is sustained. (para 4)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 351
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Collecting/bringing/forwarding prospective loanees and receiving commission from the service receivers: Notification No. 13/2003-ST date 20/06/2003: Commission Agent: By no stretch of imagination the appellant are covered under the definition of ‘commission agent’ as per the explanation to the notification. Learned Commissioner has rightly denied the benefit of the exemption under the said notification. There is no infirmity with the impugned order. Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. (para 6)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 253
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Space provided to financial instutions at authorised service stations : Bar of Limitation : There was doubt in the field as regards coverage of above activity under the category of Business Auxiliary service. The same stand clarified by the Board's notification dt. 6.11.06. Inasmuch as the period is much earlier to the issuance of said circular and the show cause notice stand issued on 24.07.08, the demand is required to be held as barred by limitation. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside on the above issue and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant. (para 4)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 218
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Prima facie the record shows that appellants had provided BAS service and received remuneration from SICCL: Partial stay granted with directions to deposit part amount of tax, interest and penalty.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 271
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Processing of Goods: Remand: Liability to service tax arises only w.e.f. 16.6.2005 as the definition of "Business Auxiliary Service" did not include processing of goods at any time prior to 16.6.2005. The service tax demand is required to be re-quantified for the period post-16.6.2005 and the case is remitted only for this purpose. (para 4)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Processing of Goods: Penalty: In view of clear language of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, the assessees are correct in contending that once the shelter under Section 80 has been extended by the Commissioner (Appeals) and this part of the order has not been challenged by the Revenue, no penalty could have been retained. Set aside the penalties as reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals). (para 4)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 262
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Allotment of PAN card to Income Tax assesses : In the present case, the definition of "business auxiliary service" under Section 65 (19) was amended with effect from 10.9.2004; whereafter "incidental and auxiliary support service" is not a part of business auxiliary service. Prior to the amendment, however, the question was whether the job undertaken by the appellant was `incidental' or `auxiliary' to any of the services mentioned at clause (i) to (iii) of Section 65 (19) of the Act. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the dues adjudged against the appellant. (para 7)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 276
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Brokerage paid to yarn brokers: Penalty: Before the Commissioner (Appeals) the assessees conceded that tax on commission paid to depot managers is payable. Not required to consider any argument on the sustainability of this demand which is accordingly uphold. The demand of Rs.1,45, 154/- which is the demand on brokerage paid to yarn brokers, is however set aside in the light of the decision of the larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai. As regards penalties, in view of the fact that the demand of approximately Rs.10 lakhs is being upheld, both penalties under Section 76 and 77 have been rightly imposed and accordingly uphold the same. The appeal is thus partly allowed by setting aside only demand of tax of Rs.3, 45,154/-. (para 2,3)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 318
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: IT Services: Accumulated Cenvat Credit: Refund: Pre-deposit: The respondents have made out a strong prima facie case for its entitlement to credit on the strength of the provisions contained in the Exim Policy. Do not find it necessary to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. The stay applications are rejected. (para 4)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 259
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Providing Table Space: The appellant had provided table space to the financial institutions for which they were getting some money from them. The issue involved in this case is covered by the decision of Silicon Honda STO 2007 CESTAT 479 wherein it was held that the activity for providing the table space to the financial institutions cannot be brought within the definition of "Business Auxiliary Service". Hence the demands are not sustainable.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 263
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Export of Services: Service provided to foreign supplier: Refund: CBEC Circular No. 111/5/2009-ST dated 24.2.2009.: The benefit of the service provided by the appellant accrued to the foreign companies outside India. In this case the service of procuring the purchase orders for the foreign supplier who is outside India and those procurement at purchase orders of good were used by the foreign supplier outside India and acted upon them supplied the goods from outside India. Following the ratio in the case of KSH International Pvt. Ltd. set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the appellant with consequential relief. (para 7)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 239
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Strapping of wire rods at the factory of manufacturer not covered under BAS at the most it is activity relating to packaging: Prima facie case made out: Stay granted.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 309
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Pre-deposit: Lower authorities have not substantiated under which of the various categories of taxable activities enumerated under BAS, the impugned, activity is classifiable. The submission that the impugned activity was originally found to be liable under the category of photography services and that the related demand had been vacated by this bench vide Final Order No 779 to 782/2007 dated 27.07.2007 is relevant and has considerable force. Complete waiver of pre-deposit of the adjudged dues and stay recovery thereof pending decision in the appeal. (para 4)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 236
  • "Banking and Other Financial Services": Collection of taxes and deposit with Government merely operation of bank accounts: Recovery stayed.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 121
  • Stay: Business Auxliary Service: Re-processing and reclaiming the metal from the waste and scrap supplied by the steel plant are exempted from the payment of service tax under Notification 8/2005 ST dated 1st March, 2005. Applicants already deposited substantial amount: On the basis of meritorious contention and fact of having already paid substantial amount stay from the balance amount of service tax, penalties and interest granted.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 108
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant a CHA gets brokerage from steamer agent for providing containers: since the secondary services ultimately get consumed/merged with services that are being exported, no service tax would be leviable on such secondary services, the assessees cannot be held liable to pay service tax.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 37
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: The impugned demand for three categories of services without indicating the process liability under the different heads is not legally sustainable. (para 5)

    ervice Tax: Site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolition: Pre-deposit: The impugned activities of surveying, drilling, blasting excavation and raising iron ore, transporting them for the purpose of sorting into iron ore lumps and iron ore fines, crushing, grading, etc. are prima facie `mining of mineral, oil or gas service brought under the service tax net from 1.6.2007. The period of dispute in the instant case is from 1.6.2007 to 31.3.2008.Therefore, prima facie the impugned activities cannot be taxed under any pre-existing entry.

    Service Tax: Turnkey contract cannot be vivisected: Pre-deposit: The appellants have rightly relied on decision of the Tribunal in Daelim Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CCE STO 2003 CESTAT 9 wherein it was held by the Tribunal that a turnkey contract could not be vivisected and part of it subjected to service tax. The appellants have made out a prima facie case against the demand and penalties. Complete waiver of pre-deposit of the dues (para 7,8)

    Service Tax: Production of iron ore amounts to manufacture and not liable to Service Tax: The appellants have substantiated their claim that production of iron ore is an exigible activity by reproducing Chapter 2601 of the Central Excise Tariff, 1985 (provision for ores) and Notification No. 4/2006-CE dated 01.3.2006 wherein ores falling under CSH 2601 to 2617 have been subjected to nil rate of duty. (para 5)

  • STO 2010 Kar 658
  • Service Tax: Clearing and Forwarding Agent service/ Del Credere Agent: Liability of Del Credere Agent: Combined reading of the definition of C&F agent under the Finance Act under Section 65(25) and the meaning of Del Credere Agent [ Meaning - He is a mere surety, liable to his principal only in case the purchaser makes default. Agent who is obligated to indemnify his principal in event of loss to principal as result of credit extended by agent to third party.-para 7], and the amendment brought into in the year 2005, whereunder Del Credere Agent is also included would clearly establishes that prior to the amendment, the service rendered by a Del Credere Agent had been excluded from service tax. Therefore, since the respondent-assessee was not a C&F Agent for IPCL as it was a Del Credere Agent the respondent-assessee is not liable to pay service tax as ordered by the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise.(Para 10).

    Appeal dismissed. 

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 58
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Service received from outside India: The issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Indian National Ship owners Association holding that recipient of service from outside India is liable for service tax only from 18.4.2006 and the same has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 14.12.2009. In the present case, the period involved is prior to 18.4.06 hence the respondent are not liable to pay service tax as demanded in show cause notice as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The appeals are rejected. (para 6)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 63
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Waiver of Pre-deposit: The demand has arisen on the ground that the appellant was providing marketing, administrative, technical and other auxiliary, services It is the submission that such activities provided by the appellant are undisputedly in relation to marketing of M/s Sun Singapore which is located outside in India. The appellant has made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit. Accordingly, stay application for waiver of pre -deposit of the amounts involved in the impugned order is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of the appeal. (para 6)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 67
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Commission: Refund claim of Service Tax without challenging the assessment - There is no such order or decision of the Central Excise officer, which is to be challenged. In that situation, the appellants cannot file any appeal against their own assessment. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed. (para 7)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 41
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Penalty: Delay in payment of Service Tax: After hearing both sides and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view that the delay in payment occurred in the period immediately after imposition of the new levy, the appellants can be given the benefit of the provisions of Section 80 for the initial period for penalties imposed under Section 76 and 77. The penalty imposed under Section 75A is confirmed as Section 80 has no applicability to penalties imposed under Section 75A. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. (para 3)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 14
  • Port Service vs. Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: The railway siding charges are not covered under the scope of port service and the same are not related to vessels or goods and also in the case of Chennai Port Trust held that the service in question is Business Auxiliary Service. Keeping in view the above decision, the pre-deposit of the amounts of Service Tax and penalty are waived.

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 75
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Machining, drilling, turning, surfacing on iron castings: The activities carried out by the appellants amounted to 'processing' which was not included in the definition of `Business Auxiliary Service' prior to 16.06.2005. The service tax liability is set aside for the period upto 16.06.2005. For the period subsequent to the coverage of processing of goods under the heading `Business Auxiliary Service' the assessees have paid service tax together with interest and the demand for the period subsequent to 16.06.2005 is upheld. (para 2)

    Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Machining, drilling, turning, surfacing on iron castings: Penalty: Penalty under Section 76 and 78 is set aside by extending protection under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. Penalty of Rs.1,000/- imposed under Section 77 of the Finance Act is upheld as the provisions of the above section are attracted for failure to file ST-3 returns. The appeal is partly allowed by setting aside the demand prior to 16.06.2005 and setting aside the penalties under Section 76 and 78. (para 2,3)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 32
  • Service Tax - Business Auxiliary Services - Penalty - Pre-deposit & Stay -There is no dispute about the fact that the appellant voluntarily paid service tax on 31.3.2006 and 25.4.2006 and the notice for imposition of penalty was issued much later on 28.11.2007. There is also no allegation of any fraud, collusion and wilful suppression of facts with intention to evade payment of service tax. Therefore, prima facie, this case appears to be covered by the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, read with Board's Circular No. 137/167/2006-CX4 dated 3.10.2007. This Circular clearly says that once the proceedings under Section 73(3) are concluded, all the proceedings including those under Section 76, 77 & 78 also shall be concluded. Requirement of pre-deposit of penalty is waived for hearing of the appeal. Stay application is allowed. (para 6)

  • STO 2010 CESTAT 55
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: The activity undertaken by the appellant is excluded from the purview of 'business auxiliary service' and the demand of service tax and penalties against the appellant are not sustainable.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1645
  • Service Tax: Commercial or Industrial Construction Service: The subject project was for construction of an Onshore Terminal for the purpose of receiving, processing/purification and distribution of natural gas extracted from the Godavari Basin: Scope and liability: The Onshore Terminal in question receives impure natural gas extracted from the earth beneath the sea, where it is processed and stored for distribution. CICS does not apply to work relating to certain, specified utilities viz. roads, airport, railways, transport terminal, bridges, tunnels and dams as per the exclusion in the definition of the taxable service. The argument of the appellants that the principle of "ejusdem generis" does not apply to interpret the expression transport terminal appearing in the list of items excluded from the definition of CICS is not correct. Principle of "ejusdem generis" applies in understanding the scope of transport terminal appearing in the company of facilities such as roads, railways, airport which are built and maintained by the government or municipality as found by the Commissioner. Section 65(25b) of the Act, as amended, defines the term "Commercial or Industrial Construction service". The Onshore Terminal in question constructed for storage and purification of natural gas extracted by Reliance Industries Ltd. does not appear to be. 'transport terminal' appearing in the definition of CICS. L&T argued that the work relating to various items which is excluded from the levy under CICS were disparate items with nothing in common and the principle of "ejusdem generis" or `Noscitur a sociis' did not apply. This argument is incorrect; all the items in the list are public goods and are provided by governments at different levels. Transport terminal constructed by L&T for RIL to store, purify & process extracted gas cannot be held to be public goods. It is not an item of infrastructure of public utility or civic amenity like the items in the definition of the service. ‘Transport Terminal' for OT is not covered by the exclusion.

    Therefore, the impugned activity is exigible to tax under the category of `Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' as held in the impugned order.(Para 5, 5.1, 5.2,6)

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1657
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service’ (BAS) during the period 10.9.2004 to 28.2.2005: Scope and whether the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 8/2005-ST dated 1.3.2005 in respect of the job work done for their clients during the period March and April 2005 and March and April, 2007 is available: The assesses were doing production not amounting to manufacture during the entire period in question and hence liable to Service Tax and that the benefit of Notification No. 8/2005-ST dated 1.3.2005 claimed is not available to the assessee as the goods on which the assessees carried out job work were returned to the 100% EOU invoking the benefit of exemption from payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 24/2003 CE dated 31.3.2003 and as per the Explanation thereto “appropriate duty of excise” shall not include ‘nil rate’ or duty of excise wholly exempt.” The issues in dispute are contentious and no prima facie case for total waiver has been made out by the applicants.(Para 4,5).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1539
  • Service Tax: Whether the job activity undertaken by the assessee during the period of dispute would constitute a ‘business auxiliary service’: Scope: The activity is the same as the one which was considered in the same assessee’s appeal No. ST/75/08. It was held that, by virtue of the exclusive clause contained in the definition of ‘business auxiliary service’ under Sec. 65 (19), the above activity would not amount to ‘business auxiliary service’. Therefore, manufacture and ‘excisable goods’ are two independent concepts and that it is not necessary that a process amounting to manufacture within the meaning of section 2 (f) should always result in emergence of an excisable goods and vice versa. Whether a process would amount to manufacture within the meaning of section 2 (f) has to be seen independently, based on the criteria evolved through various judgments of apex court. There may be a case, when a process may amount to manufacture under section 2 (f) but it may not result in emergence of an excisable product. If that be so, then the exclusion clause under BAS, which refers only to the activity amounting to manufacture within the meaning of section 2 (f), would still apply to such processes, whether or not the resultant product are excisable goods.(Para 2,3).

    Appeals allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1517
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service: Penalty: Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty taking note of the fact that appellants discharged the tax liability with interest as soon as they came to know of the liability. Further, he has also found that appellants were acting as one of the agents of Reliance Industries Ltd. and also as distributor. Further, they were also acting as del credere agent when required by Reliance Industries Ltd. The dell credere services provided by the appellants were considered to be relating to promotion or marketing or sale of goods and held to be classifiable as business auxiliary services. This shows that appellants were not aware about their service tax liability and also the bonafide of the appellants. Further, the nature of the activity undertaken by the appellants also shows that there was room for such an opinion.(Para 1,3).

    Revenue appeal rejected.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1516
  • Service Tax: Business auxillary service: Scope and liability: The appellant had constructed national Highway on BOT basis as per the tripartite assignment agreement dated 29/06/2001 between National Highways Authority and CIDBI and the appellant. The Notification issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways authorizes persons, who builds and transfers the highway, to collect toll tax. Ministry vide amendment Notification dt. 13/5/2009 has substituted the name of the applicant as who is authorized to collect toll tax. Such Toll tax collected is exempt from payment of Service Tax. In view of this, the Service Tax demanded on the amount of toll charges collected by the appellant does not have a strong basis.(Para 5).

    Stay allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1485
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Servicing/repairing of the Light commercial vehicles: Liability: The issue involved in this case is regarding inclusion of cost of the services in respect of commercial vehicle on behalf of M/s Tata Motors. The appellants are servicing motor vehicles of M/s Tata Motors in respect of ‘passenger cars’ as well as the light commercial vehicles. As regards the service tax liability on the passenger cars servicing, the appellants are discharging their service tax liability. The service tax liability in this appeal is restricted to the cost of free services in respect of 'light commercial vehicles'. The case is regarding the applicability of Service Tax on the activity of servicing/repairing of the commercial vehicles. Central Board of Excise & Customs vide Circular No. 87/05 /2006-ST dated 6.11.2006 was of the view that motor car means any motor vehicle other then transport vehicles. Since, it is undisputed, in this case, that the amount received by the appellant is in respect of servicing of 'light commercial vehicles', the Circular would directly apply and appellant is not liable to pay any Service Tax on such amount received by him. CBEC in a Master Circular No. 96/7/2007 dated 23.8.2007 clarified that Service Tax liability is only on the 'fight motor vehicles' and two-wheeler motor Vehicles. (Para 5).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1650
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Activity that during the months from 01.7.2003 to 15.6.2005, the assessee paid commission to their agents abroad for getting the export orders: The issue involved is regarding service tax, liability of the appellants as recipient of services for the commission paid by them to the agents who are staying outside India. The period involved is from July 2005 to June 2006. We find that the decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Indian National Shipowners Association vs. U.O.I. STO 2009 Bom 78, followed by High Court of Delhi in the case of Unitech Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi STO 2009 Del 877 squarely cover the issue in favour of the appellants.(Para 6).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1515
  • Service Tax: Assessee paid commission to the said foreign agents for getting export orders: Liability: The issue involved is regarding service tax liability of the appellants as recipient of services for the commission paid by them to the agents who are staying outside India. The period involved is from July 2005 to June 2006. The decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Indian National Shipowners Association vs. U.O.I. [2008-TIOL-633-HC-MUM-ST], followed by High Court of Delhi in the case of Unitech Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi STO 2009 Del 877 squarely cover the issue in favour of the appellants.(Para 6).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1397
  • Service Tax: promotion or marketing of services Scope and liability: The, revisionary authority has recorded a finding that the applicant is managing the IPO issue and collection of the application money etc., Applicants are only marketing the initial public offer of the shares issued by the companies. It is undisputed that the services provided by the applicant is to the companies who are offering shares which may not be covered as a taxable service during the relevant period. Accordingly, the applicant has made out a prima facie case(Para 5).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1365
  • Service Tax: Sale of sim cards and recharge coupons as distributors of BSNL: Liability on commission earned by distributor : BSNL had discharged service tax on the sale value of the sim cards and recharge coupons to the ultimate customers under "Business Auxiliary Services". The dispute stands settled in favour of the appellants vide decision of this Tribunal in the case of R. Venkataramanan Vs. CCE, Trichy as reported in STO 2008 CESTAT 363 and also in the case of Vallamattam Communications Vs. CCE, Cochin reported at STO 2007 CESTAT 1452 wherein held that once BSNL had paid service tax on the ultimate sale price of the sim cards and recharge coupons, distributors of BSNL were not required to discharge service tax under "Business Auxiliary Services", on the commission allowed to them as discount by BSNL.(Para 2).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1310
  • Service Tax: Commission agent under Business auxiliary service: Liability: The appellant was a commission agent covered by the Notification No.13/03 dt.20.6.03 to get exemption under the category of Business Auxiliary Service.This notification had undergone amendment and after 10.9.04 appellant is discharging its tax liability under the category of business auxiliary service. But for the period prior to 10.9.04, the appellant cannot be denied the notification benefit in absence of any condition therein. The agreement describe the scope of activity at page 89. Prima-facie Ld. Commissioner has not come out with the clear finding about each activity falling different categories. Only a compendium view was taken by the authority to deny the exemption provided by the notification.(Para 1,3).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1183
  • Service Tax: "Business Auxiliary services": Waiver of penalty u/s 78: Scope and liability: It is not the case for invocation of Section 78 penal provisions inasmuch as during the relevant period there was doubt about all such service being covered under the category of "Business Auxiliary Services". The said fact becomes evident from the Circular No. 87/05/2006-ST dated 06.11.2006 issued by the Board, wherein after taking note of the fact that certain doubts have arisen in respect of the said activity, it stands clarified that such services would be covered under the category of business auxiliary services. Commissioner (Appeals) has attributed the suppression to the appellants on the sole ground that they have agreed to pay the service tax voluntarily much before any kind of communication from the department. The trade was entertaining doubt is clear from the first line of the Board Circular which is a reasonable cause in terms of the provisions of Section 80, to set aside the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Act.(Para 2).

    Appeal disposed off.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1079
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service by arranging shipment of export cargo and receiving commission: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay: Strong prima facie case for unconditional waiver has been made out in the light of the Tribunal's order in the case of Bhuvaneswari Agencies (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore [STO 2007 CESTAT 569] holding that activity of rendering services of arranging shipment of export cargo and negotiating the same with shipping lines on behalf of the clients does not fall under the category of Business Auxiliary service.(Para 1).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1038
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service: Activities - excavation/ raising of factory grade Bauxite at the mines of Madras Aluminium Company Ltd. (MALCO) by doing drilling, deep-hole blasting, removal of overburden, breaking of larger boulders to the required size, blending of Bauxite, loading of the blended Bauxite into trucks etc.: Scope and liability: The activities carried out by the applicants are relating to mining of minerals which prima facie has been brought into the ambit of service tax only with effect from 01.06.2007. The period in dispute in the present case is September 2005 to December 2006. CBEC Circular date 12.11.2007 clarifies that prior to 01.06.2007 activities such as excavation and earthmoving, coal cutting or mineral extraction and handling transportation from pithead to a specified location was part of mining operations and not subject to levy of service tax. Applicants have made out a strong prima facie case for unconditional waiver. The case of identical service provided by VSS Engineering & Construction to MALCO, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal No. 39/2009 date 27.02.2009 is supportive. Pre-deposit waived.(Para 1).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 973
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Activity, which produces excisable goods & which amounts to manufacture, though may not result in production of excisable goods: Scope and liability: The activity of manufacturing of the product by the applicants is for and on behalf of his clients and in the manner described under the contract between the applicants and his clients. This being the finding which is not in contravention of the Circular issued by the Board on 27th October, 2008. The Circular explains the exclusion of activity from ‘Business Auxiliary Service’ when the activity amounts to manufacture of a product as described in the said Circular. The appellants has not been able to point out the activity to be in consonance with the description of the activity described in the Circular so as to claim exemption from being classified as ‘Business Auxiliary Service’ within the meaning of the said expression under the said Act. Prima facie, no case having been made out for grant of stay of the impugned order demanding the Service Tax.(Para 5, 7,8).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 924
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants are not procuring input through a third person and supply directly to the client, but are heating the oil in their premises. Therefore, this activity will not amount to their rendering "Business Auxiliary Service" so as to hold them liable to Service Tax.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 1162
  • Service Tax: Commission received in foreign exchange: Business auxiliary services: Limitation: Non-speaking order: Remand: In respect of the amount received from the foreign party, the same was exempted from payment of Service Tax vide Notification No.21/2002 ST dated 20.11.2003 up to 3.3.2005. Even the period after rescinding of the Notification would be covered by the fact that the services were exported and would not be liable for payment of Service Tax. However, this point has not been taken up by the Commissioner (A), as the appellant did not produce the evidence before him. As regards the confirmation of Service Tax under the category of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’, it was urged that major part of the Service Tax is time barred but there is no finding in the impugned order with regard to the submissions on ground of limitation. In these circumstances, matter remanded to the Original Authority for deciding the issue de novo(Para 5).
    Appeals disposed off.
     

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 962
  • Consulting Engineer Service: There is no indication to show whether appellants are covered by the definition or to show that the service provided was that of consulting engineer. On the basis of assumptions and presumptions, a case cannot be made out against the appellant. Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 862
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellant’s submission is that they could not get details of deductions from the parent company hence the delay occurred in payment of Service Tax and the delay was not intentional. However, from the records it is found that appellants could get the details of TDS sufficiently in advance and therefore the explanation relating to other deductions does not appear to be valid. Appeal rejected.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 875
  • Business Auxiliary Service: The appellants undertook the activity of  coating, bending, drilling etc. of components and machinery parts for a consideration. It cannot be said that they had undertaken the various activities on behalf of any other person. It was only with effect from 16.06.2005 that such activities undertaken by a person for another was brought under BAS.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 836
  • Refund: Share Transfer Agents Service, which became taxable w.e.f. 01/05/2006 was held not to be covered under the pre-existing Business Auxiliary Services. Service Tax refund is granted after holding that such payment had been made under a mistake of law.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 946
  • Service Tax: Call centre services to State Electricity Board: Scope and liability: The adjudication order lacks clarity. The appellants have shown that they had rendered a call centre services to State Electricity Board. Exemption is granted to services rendered by Call Centre or Medical Transcription Centre in terms of Notification 8/2003-ST dated 20.06.2003. The said notification has been amended by Notification No. 12/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004, wherein the scope of call centre has been expanded. The activities carried out by the appellant would indeed fall within the ambit of call centre as defined in the said notification. Attention was also invited to Board's clarification dated 10.05.2007. Further, the appellants had already paid 25% of the duty amount demanded along with the interest. In view of the above position, at this stage, waiver of the pre-deposit of the balance amount demanded in the impugned order is granted(Para 4).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 749
  • Input Services Vs. Sales Commission: Sales promotion has specifically been included in the definition of 'input service'. Complete waiver of pre-deposit. Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 415
  • Predeposit of penalty not to be insisted upon: The appeal should have been heard without insisting on pre-deposit of the penalties imposed. In the circumstances, the case is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) with the direction that the appeal shall be disposed on merits without insisting on the appellants making any pre-deposit. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 519
  • Service Tax: Clearing and Forwarding' services for the period 1.4.2002 to June, 2003: Scope: The department's stand to tax the activities as providing ‘clearing and forwarding' services for the period 1.4.2002 to June, 2003, may not be justified in the light of their subsequent decision to charge tax under ‘Business Auxiliary' Services from July, 2003. At the same time, the distinction of primary services and secondary services made by the applicant appears very artificial and the entire activities may fall under ‘Business Auxiliary’ service.(Para 5,6).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 539
  • Pathology Collection centre: Collection centre engaged in collection of samples and forwarding the same to the concerned laboratories for testing would not come within the purview of Business Auxiliary Services.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 755
  • Service Tax: Money Transfer Service: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay: Revenue proceeded against the appellant demanding service tax under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service" for the period from 01.07.2003 to 19.05.2004. Date of the show cause notice is 21.06.2006. In a similar matter of the same appellant, they were put to terms in the Stay Order No. 1235/2008 dated 22.12,2008. However, in this case, the learned Advocate pleaded time bar, as there was no suppression of facts. Hence, on account of time bar, full waiver of the amount demanded in the impugned order is granted, till the appeal is decided.(Para 3).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 276
  • Turn Key Contract: It is settled that a turn key contract cannot be vivisected and a part of it subjected to service tax. 

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 303
  • Burden to the Assessee: Case involving minor amount where the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal of the respondent based on the verification of facts even than Revenue filed this appeal. This is definitely improper exercise of power and unnecessary burden to the assessee. Revenue's appeal rejected.

     
  • STO 2008 CESTAT 872
  • Service Tax: Received commission for selling of SIM cards: Business Auxiliary services: Scope and liability: The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. UOI STO 2006 SC 19 observed that what a SIM Card represents is a question of fact. It is also observed that if the SIM Card is not sold by the assessee to the subscribers but is merely part of services rendered by the service providers, then a SIM Card cannot be charged separately to sales tax. In the present case, the adjudicating authority had not disputed that Spice Communication Pvt. Ltd. paid the service tax on the activation and there is no dispute about the sale of SIM cards. It appears that SIM Card would be separate object of sale. Notification No. 13/03 extended the exemption benefit to sale of goods. Hence, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly set aside the demand of tax(Para 6).

    Revenue appeal rejected.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 341
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Activity of improvement of the roads, routine maintenance and also include maintenance of toll booths, collection and remittance of toll amount to the National Highway Authority of India: Waiver of pre-deposit: The matter is before the Tribunal for the second time. In the earlier round of litigation, a sum of amount stands pre-deposited. The merits of the case has to be gone into in detail at the time of final hearing. However, the demand is hit by time bar for the period from 10.09.2004. In view of the above, the sum of pre-deposit already deposited is sufficient for the purpose of Section 35 F (Para 5).

    Stay allowed.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 707
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Activity of transfer of money including telegraphic transfer, mail transfer and electronic transfer: Scope and liability: The applicant is paying the money to a person in India on whose behalf the money is transferred from Western Union through M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd. through the applicant. The definition of the "Business Auxiliary Services" and the "banking and other financial services" needs to be gone into detail along with the agreements entered into by the applicant with the M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd. and Others. This can be done only at the time of final hearing. As such, the applicant has not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver(Para 6).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 384
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Promoting business of M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd: Scope: The issue is a very contentious one. The applicant is paying the money to a person in India on whose behalf the money is transferred from Western Union through M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd. through the applicant. Applicant is involved in the transfer of money including telegraphic transfer, mail transfer and electronic transfer. The definition of the "Business Auxiliary Services" and the "banking and other financial services" needs to be gone into detail along with the agreements entered into by the applicant with the M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd. and Others. This can be done only at the time of final hearing. As such, applicant has not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver(Para 6).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 709
  • No Suppression of Facts: It is very clear from the records that the Respondents had informed the Department all the processes undertaken by them vide letter dated 28.7.98 wherein the details of the activity undertaken has been informed to the Superintendent of Central Excise. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has elaborately dealt with the facts and came to the conclusion that there was no suppression of facts for invocation of the extended period. There is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue.  

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 245
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services – Commission agent: Scope and liability: Period of limitation: The predominant activity of the appellants is that of a commission agent. During the relevant period, the appellants are covered by Notification No.13/2003 ST dated 20.6.2003 by which commission agents are exempted from Service Tax liability under Business Auxiliary Services. This position continued till 9.7.2004 when the said Notification was amended. After the amendment, the appellants were liable to pay Service Tax. They voluntarily registered for payment of Service Tax on 14.9.2004 under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. They informed of their activities to the department. However, later revenue proceeded against the appellants on the ground that even for the period from 1st July 2003 to 30th June 2004 they were liable to Service Tax under the Business Auxiliary Services. There is also no justification for invocation of longer period. In these circumstances, complete waiver of the pre-deposit is ordered(Para 3,5).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 126
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission paid to foreign agents: prior to the introduction of Section 66A of the Act on 18.04.06, services provided by a person resident abroad was not exigible to service tax.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 386
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service: Period of limitation: Respondents took out the registration in September 2004 when there was an amendment to the definition of ‘Business Auxiliary Service' wherein "production of goods on behalf of the clients" was subject to service tax. When the clarification was issued, it appeared that their activity would not come within the purview of production. Consequently they did not pay the service tax on their activity, in spite of the fact that the registration had been taken. However, on 16.6.2005 there was further amendment by which "production or processing of goods are on behalf of the clients" was subject to service tax. It was very clear that with effect from 16.6.2005, they would be liable for service tax under the category 'Business Auxiliary Service'. Therefore with effect from 16.6.2005, they discharged the service tax liability. They had a bonafide belief that their activity would not subject to service tax with effect from 10.9.2004. They had informed the Department all the processes undertaken by them in their letter dated 28.7.98. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order came to the conclusion that there was no suppression of facts for invocation of the extended period. There is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue.(Para 4).

    Revenue appeal rejected.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 249
  • Service Tax: Service of consignment agents: Demand: Scope: The show cause notice has subsequently brought out the valuation indicating the suppression of facts. In any case, the appellants paid the service tax deposit. Appellant has not even made the copy of the contract available to the department. Prima facie, the appellants do not have a strong case.(Para 3,4).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 39
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Receiving commission for the services rendered as sub agency: Scope and liability: Appellants has produced journal vouchers to buttress his claim that receiving commission charges at 3% was for arranging sales to various parties and there was no sale of mutual funds in respect of some entries made in the show cause notice. With regard to other entries in the show cause notice, his submission is that Service Tax has been paid by M/s. Subras Investments (Agent). Both these pleas are required to be verified by the Original Authority and also the applicability of Notification No.13/2003-S.T. The prayer for remand of the case supported by the learned consultant is accepted.(Para 4),

    Appeal allowed by way of remand.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 578
  • Service Tax : Customs House Agent (CHA): Demand: Whether “handling charges” “service income”, “freight income” reimbursed by the clients is includable in taxable value: Service tax was not paid on 10% of the invoice value. On the above basis, for the present purpose, approx.10% of the taxable value for the period 02-03 to 05-06 was excluded from the gross taxable value for payment of service tax by the appellants as CHA.(Para 2). As per definition of “Business Auxiliary Service” consideration for sale of cargo space would attract the levy under the head “Business Auxiliary Service”. Against the demand of service tax under the head “BAS”, the appellants do not have prima facie case.(Para 2).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 525
  • Service Tax: CHA service: Limitation: The appellants have a case on limitation in respect of the entire demand for the period beyond the normal period of one year preceding the date of the show-cause notice.(Para 2).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.
     

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 42
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Commission paid for sale of goods outside India: Penalty: Even before the issue of the letter dated 18.8.2006 from the Superintendent, the appellants had discharged the service tax liability along with interest. Therefore the question of invocation of Section 73 (4) does not arise at all. The appellants in their letter dated 23.8.2006 had clearly informed the Department about their bonafide belief regarding the tax liability. In view of the above facts, it is very clear that the provisions of Section 73 (3) would be squarely applicable and the Revenue ought not to have proceeded against the appellants by way of issue of show cause notice. Hence the impugned order is not legal and proper.(Para 4).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 304
  • GTA Service & Business Auxiliary Service: Service tax credit of tax paid as recipient of service: When the manufacturer takes credit of service tax paid under GTA services on incoming consignments, such credit can be utilized for paying the duty on the excisable goods manufactured by them and for paying the service tax on output services. There being different opinions. Matter referred to Larger bench.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 906
  • Service Tax: Weighments of consignments in lorries and issues the slips recording the weight: Business Auxiliary Service: Identical issue has been decided in favour of the party by the Tribunal in the case of CCE Chandigarh Vs. Deepak Computer & Others in Final Order No. ST/151 to 185/2008 dated 24.6.2008, wherein it has been held that Business Auxiliary Service means any service in relation to promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to clients. As respondents are not concerned with the sale or marketing of the goods, therefore, cannot be said to be provider of incidental or auxiliary service to any activity such as promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced.(Para 4).

    Revenue appeal rejected.
     

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 458
  • Demand: Stay: Department has dropped the proposal to levy service tax in the category of BAS from the appellants in relation to the Mumbai Port. If that be so, the Revenue cannot claim Prima facie case for enforcing the impugned demand of tax against the assessee at Chennai.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 456
  • Demand: Stay: handling of export cargo: this item has been expressly excluded from the ambit of ‘cargo handling service' under Section 65(23) of the Finance Act, 1994.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 189
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Activity of producing goods for or on behalf of others, which is not amounting to ‘manufacture’: Scope and liability: The goods of particular brand are produced for particular party and supplied to that party, as per the contract. The applicants cannot use those specifications/brand names to produce the goods on their account. The applicants also cannot sell these branded goods in open market. Therefore, it is apparent that the applicants are producing goods for the client and are thus prima facie covered under BAS. The activity of production of goods in question does not amount to manufacture in the Central Excise Act, 1944 and these are covered under MTP Act, 1955. What is excluded from the definition of BAS is 'manufacture' within the meaning of Central Excise Act, 1944, which prima facie would mean that it is only manufacture of goods liable to Central Excise duty, which would stand excluded from the purview of BAS. The sale price of the goods consists of the cost of raw materials, cost of packing materials, cost of consumables, overheads and profit of the company. The value of taxable service under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 can only be the amount assigned to the taxable services rendered and this can be the value received for conversion of input into final product. Therefore, at least on this portion of the value, the service tax prima facie appears to be leviable. Applicants have not made out a strong case for the complete waiver (Para 7,8,9).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 453
  • Business Auxiliary Services v/s Commission: The discount cannot be considered as commission which requires to discharge the service tax. Stay Granted, predeposit waived.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 463
  • Service Tax: Received services in the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service' (BAS) from persons based abroad during the material period 01.01.05 to 15.06.05: Scope: In case of services rendered from abroad to assessees in India, levy was imposed by enacting Section 66 A in the Act. This Section was introduced with effect from 18.04.06. Even though as per the explanation to clause 105 of Section 65 introduced on 16.06.05 such service rendered from abroad was taxable service, the charging section namely 66A was enacted only on 18.04.06. Therefore, the impugned demand and accompanying penalties are not sustainable in law in view of a decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Ludhiana Vs. Bhandari Hosiery Exports Ltd. reported in Pre-deposit waived(Para 3,5).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 470
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services’: Liability on ‘commission’ for the sale of space for cargo in aircrafts belonging, to various airlines in terms of agreement: Scope: The appellants, as “general sale agents” of the airlines, were regained to render certain services to the latter, including collection of orders from cargo owners for space in aircrafts for export of the goods out of India. Under this agreement, the appellants were entitled to commission @ 5% and overriding commission @ 2.5%. It was said that the appellants paid service tax on the commission but not on the overriding commission. As regards service tax on commission, there is no evidence on record except the evidence of payment of an amount of Rs. One lakh. As regards overriding commission, service tax was not paid. The appellants were treated by the airlines as commission agents. The question now is whether the amount collected by them from their clients [cargo owners] as consideration for arranging space in aircrafts belonging to the airlines is exigible to service tax to the extent such amount is over and above the amount paid by them to the airlines for such space. The appellants have not made out prima facie case against the demand of service tax on this differential amount.(Para 2,3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 468
  • Service Tax: "Business Auxiliary Service” received from service providers based abroad during 9.7.04 to 30.4.07: Scope and liability: The service provider did not have any office in India and such providers of service were made liable to pay service tax only w.e.f 18.4.2006. The applicants have also submitted a couple of case law endorsing the above legal proposition. It is submitted that in view of the above legal position, the appellants have paid an amount of Rs.24 lakhs in excess.(Para 1).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 269
  • Business Auxiliary Service : Commission received from Bank for arranging loans. Matter remanded back as Commissioner did not go into the merits of the Case and proceeded on erroneous  footing that, a bank cannot avail of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’ as a client.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 280
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Dharamkanta: As respondents are not concerned with the sale or marketing of the goods, therefore, can not be said to be provider incidental or auxiliary service to any activity such as promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 194
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Activity of promotion/marketing/sale of goods and service, customer care, procurement of goods and service, production or processing of goods or providing of service on behalf of the client: Scope and liability: What has been excluded from the definition of Business Auxiliary Services is 'manufacture' within the meaning of Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944 which prima facie would mean that it is only manufacture of goods liable to Central Excise duty which would stand excluded from the purview of Business Auxiliary Services. The next submission of the applicants that the goods produced by them attract sale tax and therefore cannot be treated as services to production of goods is a contentious issue and can be decided only at the time of final hearing of the appeal, and therefore no prima facie view can be expressed at this stage.(Para 2,3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 425
  • Service Tax: Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit: Cargo Handling service: The facts relating to “Cargo Handling Services” require a closer study, which can be had at the final hearing stage. For the present, the benefit of doubt to the appellants is given in respect of some of the activities considered by the Commissioner for levy of service tax from the appellants in the category of “Cargo Handling Service”. In respect of certain other categories such as bulk-breaking, the appellants seem to have failed to make out a prima facie case.(Para 2).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 432
  • Service Tax: Waiver of pre-deposit: Demand:The differential demand of service tax is on account of denial of the benefit of Notification No. 12/03-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 whereunder no service tax was payable on the value of goods and materials sold in the course of rendering of Maintenance and Repairs Service and Installation and Commissioning Services. The benefit of the aforesaid Notifications was denied on untenable grounds. After considering the submissions, there is a prima facie case for the appellants. Apparently, the benefit of Notification No. 12/03-S.T., dated 20-6-2003and Notification No. 13/03-S.T.. was admissible to the assessee.(Para 2,3).

    Pre-deposit waived.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 61
  • Commercial concern: The Trust deed is required to be examined for the purpose of determining as to whether the respondents can be treated as a ‘commercial concern.’ Matter remanded back for denovo adjudication.

  • STO 2009 CESTAT 213
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary services: The issue is regarding the amount received by the applicant from the Franchiser: Scope and liability: The agreement is franchisee agreement and in an identical issue in respect of Amalgamated Bean Coffee Trading, who gave an identical franchisee agreement to one of their client i.e. Rishi Enterprises in Appeal No. ST/125/07 this bench in Order No. S/35/08/WZB/CSTB dated 17.12.2007 took a view that the agreement is a franchisee agreement. Since this case is also identical, the application for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts is allowed(Para 3).

    Stay granted.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 180
  • Pre-deposit: Pre-deposit Order as prima facie the Tribunal did not find merits in the appellants contention that establishment expenses being reimbursed to them by the company, that portion cannot be added for charging service tax on the business auxiliary service.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 90
  • ‘Business Auxiliary Services’:  HPCL directly marketing their products to customers and the applicant is rendering various support services which prima facie can be considered as ‘Business Auxiliary Services’. Pre-deposit Order.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 50
  • Penalty not justified: Appellant having been absolved of the tax liability, it could not be saddled with any penalty and therefore, on this ground alone, the impugned order of the Commissioner is fit to be set aside.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 56
  • Export of Service: Revenue contended that service of booking orders for foreign supplier for supply of goods in India, therefore, such service is not delivered outside India and also not used outside India. Tribunal observed that this aspect has not been considered by the adjudicating authority or the Commissioner, hence, the matter remanded back. Revenue’s appeal allowed by way of remand

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 157
  • Commission Agent: Notification No. 13/2003 not applicable to appellants as they were dealers in cars and received commission by way of arranging car loans from the banks to whom they had provided the facilities in their premises. Explanation to Notification exempts only such commission agents, who cause sale or purchase of goods on behalf of another person.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 112
  • Service Received from outside India: The service provided by a service provider who has no office in India becomes taxable with effect from 18-4-2006 with insertion of Section 66 of the Finance Act with effect from 18-4-06. Issue already settled.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 164
  • Business Auxiliary : Appellant  a resident of India but has his office in USA. He procures orders for his clients in India. The same comes under the category of “Business Auxiliary Services” which is taxable, however, the period covered in the dispute is from 8-7-2004 to 31-12-2004. Board’s Circular No. 36/4/2001-S.T. dated 8-10-2001 states that the said service became taxable from 18.4.2006 Appeal allowed with consequential relief.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 114
  • Facilitating purchase of motor vehicles: Respondent engaged in the business of sale of Two Wheel/Four Wheel motor vehicles. Besides selling the motor vehicles it also renders the services as Direct Selling Agent and Direct Marketing Agent for financial institutions like ICICI Bank, HDFC Bank etc. viz. processing papers, evaluation of customers falling in the category of Business Auxiliary Service. For facilitating purchase of motor vehicles, it receives service charges from such financial institutions. The case of the Revenue is that the respondent is liable to pay Service Tax on the amount charged in lieu of such Business Auxiliary Service. Case remanded back with directions.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 30
  • Service provided abroad : Services rendered outside India are made liable to Service tax in view of Section 66A which has been inserted in the Service tax provisions of Finance Act, 2006 with effect from 18-4-2006. Whether the services received by appellants can be considered as services received from abroad or service  received within the country being the question to be decided on merit, partial waiver granted.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 161
  • Maintenance & Repair : As, the applicants are providing service to National Highway Authority, in respect of Toll collection, keeping in view, facts and circumstances, it is not a fit case for total waiver of Service tax. Appeal dismissed by the Commissioner (A) for non compliance under Section 35 of Central Excise Act. Matter remanded back to Commissioner (Appeals).

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 148
  • In absence of specific provision, the rate of tax applicable to the service tax: shall be the rate prevailing on the date of rendering the services.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 142
  • Services rendered outside India: Stay: Prima facie, the Apex Court has held that the service tax is not leviable for the service rendered outside India. The Board Circular supports this plea. In any case, the service tax has been deposited before the issue of show cause notice. Hence the prayer for waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount is justified.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 69
  • Business Auxiliary Service : Appellants provide Business Auxiliary Service, they canvass customers for the Bank who would finance them for the purchase of vehicles. The Bank took an amount of Rs.10,000/- per vehicle as commission paid to the appellants, but actually, an amount of Rs.8,000/- was being paid to the customer directly by the bank and the appellants only received Rs.2,000/-. Appellants discharged service tax liability on Rs.2,000/- per vehicle.
    Prima facie case found to be strong.  Appellants had also paid certain amounts which were treated as pre deposit and requirement to pre deposit the balance amount waived.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 94
  • Producing or processing of goods : On the issue of processing the goods ‘for a client' and not ‘on behalf of a client’ and that processing of goods for a client become liable to service tax by widening of definition of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’ only w.e.f. 16-6-2005 which is subsequent to the period in dispute, is debatable. Prima facie case for total waiver not made out.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 13
  • Business Auxiliary Service : Powder coating the furniture, electric panel boards, metal cabinets for UPS, stabilizers, etc., and on other metallic items supplied by the customers/clients on job work basis does not amount to “manufacture” and the activity is covered under the category of “Business Auxiliary Service’ -  Exemption of the value of the goods and material sold to the customer available under Notfn.No.29/2007-ST dated 22.5.2007 – On the question of interpretation of law penalty not imposeable.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 175
  • Business Auxiliary Service : The appellants were not carrying out any marketing or sales promotion through advertisement or publication for bank. They only analyze the credentials of the customers who approached them  Prima facie not covered under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. However, merit not examined by lower authority, matter remanded.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 136
  • Franchisee Agreement : The appellants entered into an agreement with the ICICI Bank to promote retail activities of the bank. They are under the franchise agreement with the ICICI Bank. Terms and Conditions of the agreement shows that the appellants has to promote retail finance of the bank. Therefore, the appellants are providing the service of business auxiliary.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 32
  • Transportation of gas through Pipeline : The appellants only recover the cost of transportation from large customers for carrying gas from IOC and gas is purchased directly by such customers from IOC. After 15-6-05, such transportation through pipeline specifically included in the category of services for levy of Service Tax. Since they have not recovered any amount towards supply of the gas except for the transmission of the gas, prima facie case made out. Full waiver granted.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 205
  • Turnkey project : Arbitrary order : Appellants had entered into a contract with M/s Madhya Pradesh State Transport Department on a turnkey basis for automation of the entire Transport department so that driving licence and registration cards can be issued in the form of smart card. Department treated the service under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. Appellants contested stating that it was Information Technology Service which was specifically excluded from the category of Business Auxiliary Service. Tribunal found that matter was not decided by considering the contentions raised in the reply to the show cause notice and also as the order has been passed without giving personal hearing, there is gross violation of the principle of natural justice. Matter remanded.

  • STO 2008 CESTAT 40
  • Business Auxiliary Service : Prima facie selling new mobile connections and recharge coupons (bucks) belonging to M/s Spice Communications (P) Ltd., amounts to rendering of Business Auxiliary Service in light of Apex Court judgement in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd v/s UOI.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1439
  • Business Support Service: Activity carried out by the appellant do not come within the ambit of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’ but would come within the ambit of ‘Business Support Services’ which has come into effect on 1-5-2006. Since issue covered by decision of Tribunal. Full waiver granted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1395
  • Busssiness Auxillary Sercices : Stay Partly Granted :The applicants are undertaking the process of cutting of paper into sheets,  the production of goods on behalf of client is covered under the scope of service tax and thereafter  processing of goods on behalf of the client was also covered under the scope of tax. , As the applicants are undertaking the process on behalf of the client which does not amount to manufacture, prima facie not a Fit case for total waiver.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1392
  • Exemption from service tax : Receipt of payment in foreign exchange : The purpose of Rule 3(2) of the said Rules is to earn convertible foreign exchange and then benefit of exemption of Service tax would be extended to the assessee.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1022
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Service Tax paid prior to the issuance of show cause notice. Original authority imposed penalty of Rs.1,000/- u/s 78 Commissioner (Appeals) applied principles of section 11AC and Punjab & Haryana High Court decision in Machino Montell. There is no parallel provision to section 80 in Central Excise Act, 1944. Matter remanded for reconsideration.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1426
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: There are decisions of this Bench against the assessee on the question whether ‘overriding commission’ received by a GSA in Indian currency from foreign airlines companies is eligible to service tax in the category of Business Auxiliary Service. Full waiver granted on the contentions raised by appellants relating to limitation.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1394
  • Composite Contract: Stay: Service Tax in respect of installation and commissioning of ATMs under the category of ‘Commissioning or Installation Services’. A composite cannot be vivisected has already been decided in the case of Daelim Industrial Co. which has been upheld by the Honorable Supreme Court. The Chennai Bench in the case of Diebold Systems Pvt. Ltd. on the similar issue had granted waiver from pre deposit. Following the judicial discipline full waiver granted. Revenue involved being more than Rs.5 Crores, matter to be heard out of turn. Stay application allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1019
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay Application: The service recipient is resident abroad and has no office in India. Overriding commission received from airlines abroad. Tribunal’s decision in ETA Travel Agency stayed by the High Court cannot be followed. Stay Application allowed conditionally.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1062
  • Business Auxiliary Service : The banks were clients being recipient of such services from the respondents. The respondents were required to obtain loan applications from their customers who desired to avail loans from the banks. The respondents had undertaken to process those applications and after scrutiny forward them to the bank, for such services, they were paid commission by the bank, which was reflected in their account. Once consideration accrued to them, as against the services provided by them to the bank, by way of commission, it was hardly of any consequence how a portion of that commission, which as per the particulars provided by the Bank was given as “pay out” to assessees in respect of which even the TDS was deducted, was spent by them. If they chose to give some amount from that gross commission amount to their customers either directly or through the bank, it would not change the nature of the receipts in their hand. Commissioner (A) not examined these facts. Matter remanded back.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1107
  • Stay: Business Auxiliary Service: Sharing thermal fluid with units similar to the assessee and charging them for the heat energy sold cannot be brought under the definition of ‘procurement of goods or services, which are inputs for the client’ and therefore as “Business Auxiliary Service”. Demand unsustainable. Stay granted.

  • STO 2007 P&H 1223
  • Business Auxiliary Service : Collection of blood samples for principal do not fall under BAS. Technical testing or analysis in relation to human being or animals is excluded.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1233
  • Stay : Business Auxiliary Service : Services provided to passengers of train in AC 2/3 tier coach since the appellants received rewards from Railways, the service could be considered as ‘customer care service’, for 1st class passengers since appellants directly collected charges from customers, it cannot be considered as customer care service on behalf of the client. Accordingly, stay partly granted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 631
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Scope and liability: The service rendered by the appellants on behalf of the railway administration to AC-2 tier/3 tier passengers in the specified trains was in the nature of a 'customer care service' inasmuch as, the passengers were customers of the railways and for the services rendered by the appellants, they were rewarded by the railways. However, in regard to the services rendered by the appellants to the first class passengers, they were receiving consideration directly from the passengers albeit at the rate prescribed by the railways. In respect of this part of the service in question, the revenue is yet to establish that it is a 'customer care service provided on behalf of the client'. The appellants have not succeeded in taking their service out of the purview of 'customer care service provided on behalf of the client', one of the business auxiliary services specified under section 65 (19). (Para 3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 624
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Tax liability on commission paid to commission agent based abroad: The impugned order is supported by the legal provisions. However, the case law cited supports the appellants' challenge to the demand and penalty. The dispute involved has to be resolved after listening to the detailed arguments of both sides. As the appellant has already paid the service tax demanded as also the interest,(Para 4).

    Pre-deposit waived.

  • STO 2007 Sikkim 361
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Sale of Lottery tickets: As such those would not be goods within the meaning of the definition clause in the Sale of Goods Act. If the lottery tickets are not goods, the writ petitioners cannot said to be rendering any service in relation to the promotion of their client's goods, or marketing of their client's goods, or sale of their client's goods.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1105
  • Stay: Business Auxiliary Service: The term “processing” added in the definition from 16.6.2005, Board’s Circular No. 341/13/2005-TRU dated 12-5-2005 distinguishes ‘production of goods on behalf of the client’ and ‘production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client’. Accordingly for the demand prior to 16.6.2005 on the appellants who were only doing the processing on unmachined castings. Stay granted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1148
  • Stay: Penalty: Service tax was discharged by the assessee before the department initiated any action. They have cited reliance on the Notification to claim exemption from Service tax. The Review Authority has imposed penalties. Similar matters already listed. Stay Granted. Matter listed with other matters for hearing.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1058
  • Demand : Notification.No.25/2004-S.T exempted service provided under the category of Business Auxiliary Service for the period from July, 2003 to September, 2004. Expanded applicability of notification exempted services provided by appellants to customers of the Bank in relation to the services provided by the Bank to them.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1166
  • Stay : Appellants brought within the category of Registrar and Share Transfer Agents from 1-5-2006. Revenue proceeded to demand Service Tax for previous period under the Business Auxiliary Service. The issue already decided by Tribunal in favour of appellants holding that such activity of transferring of shares and handling of shares would not come under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. Stay granted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 310
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service and Cargo handling service: Applicant is a transporter and receiving the goods booked for destination by other transporters and other transport agency is paying the service tax on the entire freight amount. In this situation, the applicants have a strong case in their favour. (Para 2,3).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1291
  • Stay: Business Auxiliary Service: Discount cannot be considered as commission. Prime facie case made out. Waiver granted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1103
  • Selling of sim cards : Prima facie, cannot be covered under the category of Business Auxiliary Service.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 187
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service: Taxable value: The claim of the applicant regarding benefit of notification was not raised before the lower authority. The only issue raised before the lower authority was that they were only liable to pay service tax on the amount of commission which they actually retained and whatever passed on to their customers, is not liable for service tax. It is not a case for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax.(Para 2,3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2007 Sikkim 362
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Sale of Lottery Tickets: Sale or promotional or marketing service: On a balance of circumstances it appears that the essence of the writ petitioner's business venture is that of a middleman, and if it is a middleman's venture, then the activity, properly so called, cannot but be promotion or marketing. There will be no interim order. (para 19,20)

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1043
  • Service rendered outside India : Service tax not payable.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 51
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Demand: The appellants are not actually promoting the business of GESCOM. The only service, which they render and which will come under the taxable net, would be billing. That may come under the 'Business Auxiliary Services'. All other services, which they render, relate to 'Information Technology Service', which is excluded from the scope 'Business Auxiliary Services'. A large number of computers are supplied to GESCOM by the appellants and for the supply of these computers, printers and other hardware items, the appellants are receiving hiring charges. Moreover, they are also required to generate MIS reports and do a lot of data processing and generate very many reports. These things would squarely fall under the purview of 'Information Technology Services', which would not be taxable presently. Only the billing activity rendered by the appellants would come within the purview of 'Business Auxiliary Services'. Therefore, matter remanded to the Original Authority for re-computation of the Service Tax liability by excluding the amount charged for hiring of the hardware and the amount charged for Information Technology Services. While calculating the duty liability, gross amount collected for services should be treated as including the Service Tax.(Para 4.1)

    Appeal disposed of way of remand.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1263
  • Stay : Business Auxiliary Service : Carrying on ‘House Keeping Services’ rendered in the Academic Center would not come within the ambit of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’. Prime facie no error apparent to grant stay of the operation of the order.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1285
  • Stay : Buying and selling of re-charge coupons for making telephone calls is separate from being an agent. The demand is prima facie not sustainable.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1258
  • Business Support Service: Verification of the details given by the loan seekers for ICICI cannot be treated as promoting their business. The services rendered by the applicants would be rightly classifiable as "Business Support Service" which came into taxable net only w.e.f. 1-5-2006.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1150
  • Stay: Business Auxiliary Service: Carrying on the process of Rubber packing and rubber edging of polypropylene carpets and bringing the goods into existence is an activity of manufacture cannot be denied. Prima facie, plea that Service Tax is not attracted is required to be accepted. Stay application is allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1422
  • Business Auxiliary Service : The assessee, who had not claimed the benefit of exemption Notification initially, was not barred, prohibited or estopped from claiming such a benefit at a later stage.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 749
  • Service Tax: ESS services: Scope and liability: Benefit of exemption Notification not claimed initially, was not barred, prohibited or estopped from claiming such a benefit at a later stage: Before the original authority, the assessee did not claim any exemption from payment of tax. But, before the first appellate authority, they claimed such exemption under clause (c) of Notification No. 25/2004-ST, dated 10-9-2004, which had exempted the value of Business Auxiliary Service from payment of tax for the period prior to 10-9-2004. This claim was rejected by learned Commissioner (Appeals). In the present appeal, the assessee has abandoned the above claim and has claimed the benefit of clause (d)(iii) of the Notification. In support of this belated claim, learned counsel has relied on the apex court's judgment in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT STO 1996 SC 9 wherein the Tribunal was held to have jurisdiction to examine a question of law which had not been raised before lower authorities. Reliance has also been placed on the Apex Court's judgment in Share Medical Care v. Union of India STO 2007 SC 1329, wherein it was held that the assessee, who had not claimed the benefit of exemption Notification initially, was not barred, prohibited or estopped from claiming such a benefit at a later stage. In view of the case law cited by counsel, the assessee's claim for exemption under clause (d)(iii) of the above Notification needs to be examined by the original authority in accordance with law.(Para 1,2).

    Appeal allowed by way of remand.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 367
  • Service Tax: Cenvat credit of service tax paid on commission and advertisement: The commission agents prima facie do promote the sale and once the definition of the input service includes services used for advertisement or sale promotion, market research the same shall be squarely covered by the definition of the input service, more so when it forms part of assessable value for which no deduction is permissible. In respect of the balance amount, which has already been deposited and another amount relates to advertisement services for which the Commissioner has not cited any evidence to show that the advertisement was done both for manufactured goods as well as traded goods. The applicants have been able to make out a prima facie case in their favour, (Para 3).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1023
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay application: Challenge on the ground that activity carried out by appellants results in a process of manufacture and the valuation arrived at is not correct. Amount of Rs.85 lakhs already deposited. Stay application partly allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 254
  • Service Tax: B.A.S.: Waiver of pre-deposit: No strong prima facie case for total waiver has been made out, as prima facie the applicants herein on whom there is a demand of service tax, have rendered services in the nature of business auxiliary services, as seen from the terms and conditions of the agreement entered into by them with M/s. Amalgamated Bean Coffee Trading Co. Ltd. for running the business of cafe for making and selling coffee etc. under the name and style of M/s. Cafe Coffee Day.(Para 1).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 295
  • Service Tax: business auxiliary services: Commission earned on sale: The appellants is actually helping some other manufacturing companies to sell their manufactured products. In that capacity they received commission as a 'commission agent'. The appellant is liable to pay service tax on the commission collected under "business auxiliary service." However’ during the relevant period, there was exemption Notification No. 13/2003 dated 20.06.2003 which exempted commission agents from liability to service tax. Original authority has denied the benefit of exemption on the ground that the appellant did not deal with the goods. the Service tax liability had already been discharged by the main service tax provider(Para 1,2).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1405
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Sale of SIM cards: Appellants purchase SIM cards and recharge coupons from BSNL and sell the same for a profit. Sales Tax Authorities are proceeding against the similarly situated parties for payment of Sales Tax. This Bench already taken a view that the appellants do not render any service but simply sell the goods. Therefore, they would not be liable to pay Service Tax under the category of “Business Auxiliary Services”.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 307
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Telephone service: Service tax has been discharged by BSNL and they were not getting Commission but were trading in the cards. They were discharging sales tax. No liability towards service tax.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 526
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Liability on Overriding Commission: This Bench dismissed a similar appeal of M/s. ETA Travel Agency Pvt. Ltd. STO 2007 CESTAT 206 after overruling the jurisdictional objection and sustaining the demand of Service tax on ORC for a comparable period. Penalty in this case is reduced(Para 3,4).

    Appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 220
  • Penalty: Their job was to process the loan applications of public and forward the same to the Bank in Nasik for sanction of loans. They have not collected any Service tax from the parties concerned nor the bank has agreed to pay the same on such kind of service rendered to public. Service tax paid with interest. Nominal penalty imposed by lower authority accepted by appellants. Enhancement of penalty not warranted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 229
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Services of Commission Agents dealing with Mutual Funds: The appellants are claiming exemption under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 which exempts Commission Agents handling 'Goods'. SEBI has defined the term Mutual Funds as also coming within the term "Goods". In a similar matter, the Mumbai Bench in the case of M/s. Ankam Finvest Pvt. Ltd. v. CST, Mumbai - STO 2007 CESTAT 19 has remanded the matter for de novo in view of the definition given to Mutual Funds by SEBI. The matter has been remanded by the Mumbai Bench. Since the matter is still pending re-adjudication, the prayer of the Chartered Accountant for granting waiver of pre-deposit is accepted.(Para 2,3).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 449
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Sale of extended warranty coupons: The appellants have already paid Service Tax with regard to the Commission received for promotion of extended warranty coupons. In so far as the inclusion of the amounts paid by the customer for the sale of coupons prime facie, the services are rendered by the Maruti Udyog Limited in terms of the contract, therefore, the appellant cannot be charged for Service Tax on this amount. The appellants have strong case in their favour,(Para 4).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 26
  • Service Tax: Commission: The finding in the impugned order that period of service is not known is contrary to the facts on record. Clearly, service was rendered before the imposition of the levy. Therefore, the demand is not sustainable. Impugned order is set aside(Para 6,7).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 504
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service / Manufacture: Scope: Whether the activity undertaken by the appellants would amount to manufacture or not. What the appellants did was to convert the steel plates and sheets into beams/boxes, which are goods distinct and different in character from the inputs used. Even according to the Revenue, these beams/boxes are 'intermediates' in the process of conversion of the plates and sheets to the ultimate product of the principal manufacturer (M/s. BHEL). This would amount to admitting that the appellants were converting inputs to intermediate products, in which event it cannot be gainsaid that the process amounted to manufacture. The basic condition under Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994 for rendering 'production of goods on behalf of client" taxable has prima facie not been satisfied in this case.(Para 1).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 487
  • Business Auxiliary Service: They have purchased BSNL post-paid/pre-paid Cellular Sim Cards and sold the same in the market. They have paid sales tax. BSNL has clarified that it has paid service tax on the entire amount. No service tax can be levied for selling of SIM cards.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 7
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Activity of Powder Coating on Furniture: Scope and liability: Powder coating activity is a process of manufacture in terms of 'manufacture' provided under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore the appellant has made out a strong case in his favour.(Para 2).

    Stay allowed, pre-deposit waived.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 291
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service' and 'Repair and Maintenance Service': Sale of SIM cards: Commissioner (Appeals), Coimbatore, had dealt with the same issue in relation to another assessee M/s. Shilpa Agencies and held that the activity involved in selling simcards purchased from BSNL did not involve any service, particularly 'Business Auxiliary Service' and allowed the appeal of the M/s. Shilpa Agencies. In the impugned order, Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has taken the view that the appellants were the franchisee of BSNL and were acting on behalf of BSNL, rendering business auxiliary service in exchange for commission paid by BSNL. The appellants had submitted before him that they had received only discounts at the time of purchase of simcards from BSNL and were not receiving any commission for their sale. Ld. Counsel submits that the appellants only purchase simcards from BSNL at a discount which they sell at a price not exceeding the MRP fixed by BSNL. The impugned transactions were between two principals. There was no element of service to BSNL involved in the appellants' purchasing and selling simcards for profit.(Para 2). Appellants have made out a strong prima facie case against the impugned demand and penalties. None of the parties has produced the copy of the agreement between BSNL and JRCPC. A final view in the matter can be taken only on a detailed study of the nature of the transactions and conditions governing them; which will be known, inter alia, on a perusal of the agreement between BSNL and JRCPC.(Para 4).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 96
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Commission Agent: C&F Agent: In substance the relationship of the respondent with its principal is that of a commission agent. Receiving the goods and storing them are only incidents, which would enable the appellant to sell the goods for a commission in the territory allotted to it. Not covered in the definition of C&F Agent. Commission Agents exempted from service tax vide Notfn.no.13/2003-ST.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 347
  • Service Tax: Out-of-pocket expenses: Taxable value: Application for modification of stay order: These trade notices were dealing with certain specified services, which, of course, did not include "Business Auxiliary Services", which were not in the list of taxable services under the Finance Act at that time. Appellants however, relied on the principle discussed in the trade notices and has urged that the same be applied to the actual expenses incurred by the appellants and reimbursed to them by M/s. ICICI Bank (service recipient). The submissions made in support of the present application is argumentative and does not bring out a prima facie case for his clients inasmuch as the trade notices of 1997 and 1998 did not, deal with the question whether, in relation to rendering of "Business and Auxiliary Services", out-of-pocket expenses reimbursed by the service recipient could be included in the gross amount under Section 67 of the Finance Act for the purpose of levy of Service tax. "Business Auxiliary Services" became taxable for the first time on 1-7-2003. No circular of the Board or trade notice of any Commissionerate on the above question in relation to "Business Auxiliary Services" has been cited by the counsel.(Para 2).

    Pre-deposit reduced.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 206
  • Business Auxiliary Service: overriding commission received from abroad from Malaysian Airlines: Commission received in India in convertible foreign currency is exempted under Notification No. 21/2003-ST, however, company received commission in India in Indian currency from Indian office of the Airlines, hence, liability to service tax and interest confirmed. Penalty u/s 78 reduced, penalty u/s 76 sustained.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 398
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Scope: The agreement indicates that the appellants and the M/s. Geojit Infofin Technologies Ltd. were carrying on joint business activity on the basis of sharing the profits in the ratio of 75:25. There is also share of losses. In view of this position, prima facie appellant cannot be said to be promoting business and marketing the products on commission basis. Appellants have very strong case on merits.(Para 3).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 165
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Registrar and Share Transfer Agent: Demand prior to 1.5.2006 for Registrar & Share Transfer Agent cannot be confirmed. They were not providing any Business Auxiliary Service. Stay rejected.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 479
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Mere fact of financial institutions being provided with space by the appellant and the appellant receiving some money for that lease of table space cannot be brought within the definition of "Business Auxiliary Services".

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1237
  • Stay : Business Auxiliary Service : Sale of SIM cards and Recharge coupons. Following earlier decisions, stay partly granted.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 392
  • Service Tax: C & F services and business auxiliary services: Scope and liability: The relevant contract between the ONGC and the appellants relate to transportation for crude oil, treatment and charges for other services such as the laboratory services etc. These services, prima facie, are not in the nature of either C & F services or business auxiliary services.(Para 2,3).

    Stay application allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 567
  • Service Tax: C & F Agents' service: Loading of coal at various collieries: Scope and liability: The kind of activity undertaken by the appellants is not similar to the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. CCEx., Chennai reported in STO 2006 CESTAT 66. The decision of the Tribunal in the case of Coal Handlers Pvt. Ltd. v. CCEx., Kol.-I reported in STO 2004 CESTAT 29 is against the appellants. Therefore, the appellants' case prima facie is not covered by the Larger Bench decision. The Board on a representation from the Coal Merchants has clarified that the activity undertaken by them would be in the ambit of C & F services.(Para 3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 90
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Penalty: Amnesty scheme: In the case of CCE Bhopal v. Bharat Security Services & Workers Cont. reported in STO 2005 CESTAT 245, Tribunal rejected identical plea of DR and held that the provisions of scheme would apply to all assessees. In as much as in the present case, duty and interest was deposited before 30-10-04, no penalty is imposable on the appellant. The same is accordingly set aside(Para 4).

    Appeal allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 1140
  • Stay: Business Auxiliary Service: There are no reasons to grant waiver as admittedly, they were carrying on business and receiving commission from ICICI.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 19
  • Service Tax: Banking and financial services and Business Auxiliary Services: Scope and liability: Both the appellants had raised a specific plea before the authorities below that 'mutual fund' is also 'goods' as per the definition of SEBI. The authorities below have not recorded any finding as to why Mutual Fund cannot be regarded as 'goods' so as to be covered under Notification 13/2003-S.T. The impugned order is set aside and matter remanded to the Dy. Commissioner of Service Tax for fresh decision on the specific plea made herein.(Para 4).

    Appeal allowed by way of remand.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 511
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Scope and liability: The applicant is a retailer of M/s. Reliance Infocomm Ltd. engaged in purchase and sale of telephony products with connection. In view of the Notification No. 12/03 dated 20-6-03 which provide exemption so much of the value of all the taxable services, as is equal to the value of goods and materials sold by the service provider to the recipient of service, prima facie, the applicant has a strong case in their favour,(Para 3).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 95
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service: Turnkey projects: Appellants activity of transporting the material to the project sites was part of turnkey contracts and that the same did not involve provision of business auxiliary service to their clients. The transaction was based on works contract. The Tribunal had already held that there would be no service in the transaction of the works contract. The materials formed components of the projects. The decision in the case of Daelim Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara STO 2003 CESTAT 9, wherein the Tribunal had made the following observations: "It is well settled that a work contract cannot be vivisected and part of it subjected to tax. The impugned orders have proceeded to do precisely that. Therefore, they are required to be set aside." In view of the above ratio, the impugned order was not sustainable.(Para 2,4).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 420
  • Central Excise: Waiver of pre-deposit: During the period of dispute, which is prior to 18-4-2006, their activity did not amount to "manufacture" and therefore the demand of duty is unsustainable. This claim of the appellants was accepted by the Tribunal in respect of their Vishakapattinam factory as per Order Nos. A/473-475/WZB/06/C-II, dated 24-3-2006 - STO 2006 CESTAT 1292 - in Appeal Nos. E/859 & 860/2004 and E/2598/2005. It is further pointed out that Service tax of over Rs. 2.00 crores was paid by the assessee in respect of the same activity, which was treated by the department as a taxable service. If the demand of duty is held to be sustainable, the above Service tax will have to be set off against that demand. In another case of the same assessee, a similar set-off was allowed by the Bench. The final order of the Tribunal cited by learned Consultant is apparently applicable to the issue in the present case. Therefore, the appellants have strong prima facie case against the demand (Para 2,4,5).

    Pre-deposit waived, stay allowed.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 218
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Stay: Services rendered by appellants became exigible to service tax from 1.7.2003, however, since Commissioner (A) did not take into consideration request for modifying the stay order asking them to pre deposit Rs.10 lakhs and without hearing the appellants dismissed the appeal for non compliance. Matter remanded back to Commissioner (A) with directions to hear appeal on merit after appellants have fulfilled the condition of pre deposit within one month.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 235
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary service: Management consultancy: Scope & liability: In regard to an identical agreement between two other group companies of the appellant, the Bombay Bench of the Tribunal has held that the service rendered under the contract would fall for tax under the category of "business auxiliary service". Specific reliance is being placed on para '3' of that order STO 2005 CESTAT 302. The nature of the Executory Services provided by the Marketing Team Staff would more appropriately fall under "business auxiliary service" & not "Management Consultancy service" as the definition Management Consultancy Service remains the same even after the levy of inclusion & of Service Tax on "business auxiliary service" in the year 2003. When an existing Tariff definition remains the same, then the introduction of new Tariff entry would imply that the coverage under the new Tariff for purpose of Tax is an area not covered by the earlier entry. The new entry is extension of the scope of coverage of Service Tax and not carving out of a new entry, from the erstwhile entry of "Management Consultancy Service". (Para 3).

    Appeal disposed off.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 346
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Demand: Period of limitation: The appellants were marketing the bankers' products during the above period through their employees and that the salaries paid and the provident fund contributions and insurance contributions made in respect of these employees by the appellants were reimbursed by the Bank. It is on the gross amount so collected by the appellants from the Bank for the above services that the Commissioner demanded Service Tax. The demand is in adjudication of a show-cause notice dated 25-11-2005 covering the aforesaid period. The period from November 2004 to March 2005 is within the normal period of limitation prescribed under Section 73 of the Finance Act and, according to ld. Counsel's estimate, the tax, if found payable for this period, would be around Rs.69 lakhs. According to the ld. Counsel, the demand for the earlier period is time-barred inasmuch the extended period of limitation was not invocable on the facts of this case. All the requisite information had been made available to the Department through statements as early as in 2004 and therefore it was not open to them to allege suppression or concealment of facts, for the purpose of invoking the extended period of limitation under Section 73 ibid.(Para 2,4).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 11
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Demand: The demands for short levy should have been issued within the period of limitation. The same has been issued beyond the period of limitation even when all the facts were known to the department. Appellants have a strong case.(Para 3).

    Balance pre-deposit waived.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 588
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Commission: It is the contention of the Counsel that their clients are importer/exporters and they are canvassing import/export to a particular shipping line, therefore, this activity does not come within the ambit of the definition. It is required to analyze the definition of "Business Auxiliary Services" in terms of the activities carried out by the appellants at the final stage.(Para 4).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 473
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Appellants were inter alia helping the companies organize meetings of investors. A service of this nature, prima facie, partakes the character of "promotion or marketing of services provided by the client".

  • STO 2007 CESTAT 80
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Since the appellants promote the services rendered by their clients, it is very clear that during the relevant period, the services rendered by the appellant would definitely fall within the category of Business Auxiliary services.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 380
  • Service Tax: Business auxillary services provided by commission agent: During the period of dispute there was exemption notification No. 13/03-ST dated 20-6-2003 which provides exemption to the business auxiliary services provided by a commission agent from the service tax leviable thereon under sub-section (2) of Section 66 of the Finance Act. The appellant has made a prima facie case in their favour.(Para 2).

    Pre-deposit waived and stay granted.
     

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 746
  • Service Tax: "ESS Services" as "Business Auxiliary Services": Scope and liability: The appellants were rendering what was called "ESS Services" on behalf of the above company to cable operators during the above period. The lower authorities classified the said services as Business Auxiliary Services as defined under Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994 and, accordingly, demanded tax on the value of consideration collected by the assessee from their customers. It appears from the records that the classification of "ESS Services" as "Business Auxiliary Services" is consistent with the provisions of the above Agreement. Before the original authority, the assessee did not claim any exemption from payment of tax. But, before the first appellate authority, they claimed such exemption under Notification No. 24/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004 which had exempted the value of business auxiliary services from payment of tax for the period prior to 10-9-2004. The claim of the party was under clause (c) of the Notification. This claim was rejected by learned Commissioner (Appeals). In the present appeal, their claim is under clause (d) of the Notification. This is a claim not raised before the lower authorities. The claim under clause (c) of the Notification has, apparently, been abandoned by the assessee. In other words, there seems to be no sustainable challenge against the impugned order.(Para 1).
    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 184
  • Business Auxiliary Service: Services rendered by the respondent on behalf of CDA is well structured and codified and it cannot be categorized as 'customer care service'. Maintaining the armed forces is part of the sovereign activity of the State and that it is specious to contend that it is a 'business activity' with an eye on profits, the activities of electoral machinery of the country also cannot be termed as a "business activity”. Preparation of voter list is not a business activity.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 745
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Benefit of Notification No. 21/2003-Service Tax, dated 20-11-2003: Violation of Principles of Natural Justice: Remand: Prima facie, the benefit of the Notification is applicable as the appellants have received the consideration from abroad in convertible foreign exchange. The findings recorded by the Commissioner that the appellants did not produce evidence is not correct. The reply to Show Cause Notice refers to the evidences and, therefore, the Commissioner ought to have examined the evidence and pronounced the order. Non-examination of the evidences produced violates Principles of Natural Justice. The appellants have now produced the Chartered Accountant's certificate also to support their plea. The matter is remanded to the Commissioner for de novo to re-examine the claim of benefit of Notification in the light of the evidences produced.(Para 5).
    Appeal disposed by way of remand.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 216
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Exemption: Demand is for July 2003 to September 2004 and the Ministry had issued exemption in terms of the Notification No. 25/2004 dated 10-9-2004 wherein 'a service incidental or auxiliary to any activity specified in clause (d)(i) to (iii) of the Notification' is exempted. Commissioner has not given any reason for denying the exemption except to say that the Notification is not applicable. (Para 2,4).
    Stay application allowed, pre-deposit waived.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 389
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay: It is now on record that the DGST passed an order pursuant to the High Court's direction that the service in question has been held to be taxable as 'Business Auxiliary Service'. This decision of the DGST is being challenged before the competent court, but there is no order of stay of operation of the DGST's decision. The appellants, being members of the association which obtained a judgment from the High Court, are presently bound by the DGST's decision which was taken in pursuance of the High Court's directive. The appellants can hardly claim prima facie case against the above levy of service tax inasmuch as the DGST has declared the service to be taxable as "Business Auxiliary Service". In the present applications, there is no plea of financial hardships.(Para 1).

    Partial pre-deposit ordered.
     

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 204
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Scope and liability: Show Cause Notice has clearly brought out the facts leading to suppression and, therefore, it cannot be said that the appellants did not have any intention to evade duty. At least they should have informed the Department of their activity which they have admittedly not done so. Therefore, at this stage, the benefit of time bar cannot be given to them while considering the amounts to be fixed for pre-deposit. In so far as the plea that the activity does not come within the ambit of such Business Auxiliary Services is concerned, this is a contentious issue which has to be considered only at the final stage in the light of the definitions and the judgments.(Para 5).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 550
  • Service Tax: Service of business auxiliary: Waiver of pre-deposit: In the present case, the applicant entered into an agreement with the ICICI bank to promote their retail finances. Therefore, it is not a fit case for total waiver(Para 5).

    Pre-deposit ordered.
     

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 320
  • Facts about the Service Provided : Factual position as to what is the service being rendered is not on record. Matter remanded back.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 164
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary services: Supply of computers on hire basis: The appellants rely on the definition of the said term under Section 65(19) and contend that merely hiring computers would not come within the category of Business Auxiliary services. The issue requires interpretation of the term under the said section. That can be done only at the final stage.(Para 1,3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 656
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary services: Penalty u/s 76: The applicants were functioning from the new premises without a valid registration and they were also not submitting return. They were therefore not entitled for the credit. The Cenvat credit has been taken on the telephone bills of Hutch in the name of different persons and different addresses. The applicant have failed to make out a prima facie case in their favour.(Para 4).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2006 CESTAT 117
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Application for early hearing: Application for early hearing is dismissed, as neither has any demand of tax been quantified nor is there any other ground for jumping the queue.(Para 1).

    Appeal dismissed.

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 39
  • Consulting Engineer Service: Royalty and Know-how Payment: Revenue has not made out a clear case that the respondents have incurred certain expenditure for availing the services of a consulting engineer from their foreign collaborators. Whole agreement is based on what can be called as a transfer of know-how, involving royalty. While one cannot rule out the possibility of camouflaging certain component of services under the carpet of royalty, it is not the case here as neither the show cause notice issued nor the appeal petition filed by the Revenue alleges before us such a situation.

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 228
  • Service Tax: Tax on royalty: Waiver of pre-deposit: Royalty paid for Technical Know-how involving intellectual property was not taxable under the Finance Act, 1994 prior to 10-9-2004. Even if such service be assumed to be taxable under the said Act, the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 18/04-ST, dated 10-9-04 is available to the appellants in respect of the intellectual property right acquired by them during the period of dispute.(Para 3).

    Pre-deposit waived.

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 145
  • Service Tax : Waiver of pre-deposit : The applicants were providing the transport service directly or indirectly to arrange the despatch of the goods and maintained records of receipt and despatch of goods. Therefore, prima facie Applicants are covered under the provisions of Clearing and Forwarding Agent and are liable for Service Tax.(Para 4).

    Pre-deposit ordered.
     

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 212
  • Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Service: Scope: Prima facie it is not possible to say that the services rendered by the appellant to its client fall within Business Auxiliary Service. The Business Auxiliary Service is in relation to the promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to the client i.e the person to whom the services were to be provided. The applicant was not dealing with any goods produced or provided by or belonging to its client. Clauses iv, vi and vii of the definition of Business Auxiliary Service relate to procurement of goods or services which are inputs for the client, provision of service on behalf of the client and a service incidental auxiliary to any activity specified in clauses (i) to (vi). Services rendered by the applicants do not disclose that the applicant was procuring the goods or services for its clients for being used as inputs, nor were any services rendered on behalf of the said clients.(Para 2)

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 107
  • Service Tax: Waiver of pre-deposit: C & F agent/ Commission agent: The C & F agent has been defined in the Act "means any person who is engaged in providing any service, either directly or indirectly, connected with the clearing and forwarding operations in any manner to any other person and includes a consignment agent". The work done by the Appellant is as a Commission Agent. He is not concerned with clearing and forwarding operation and he also not a consignment agent.(Para 1,2).

    Pre-deposit waived.
     

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 199
  • Clearing and Forwarding Service: To receive such goods from their principal, store them in their godown, clear them to buyers, collect payments for the sale and transmit the same to the principal after taking their commission. This activity would attract the definition of "Clearing and Forwarding Agent".

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 341
  • Commission Agent Vs Consignment Agent: The appellant's agents were not physically dealing with goods. They were only identifying customers, collecting purchase orders and awarding such orders to the appellants against payment of commission. There being no dispute of this fact, no difficulty in identifying the appellant's agents as "Commission Agents".

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 70
  • Service Tax: Waiver of pre-deposit: As per the Section 65(106) of Finance Act, 1994 technical testing & analysis in relation to human beings or animal is exempted. Appellant are collecting the samples and also doing initial testing. Further, tested samples were sent to Dr. Lal PathLabs Pvt. Ltd. As the appellants are conducting testing also in respect of samples. Prima facie, appellants had a strong case in their favour.(Para 2).

    Stay petition allowed.
     

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 88
  • Service Tax:Waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty: In this case, the transfer of technology was effected during the year 1995-96. This fact was not disputed by the Revenue, therefore, prima facie, the applicants have a strong case as the provision of service tax was not in force at that time.(Para 2).

    Pre-deposit waived.
     

  • STO 2005 AP 96
  • Service Tax: Business auxillery services: Appeal under Article 226 of the Constitution of India: Registrar and Share Transfer Agent is a service rendered which is in the nature of incidental or auxiliary support service rendered in the contract of sale of goods (securities) belonging to the client(Para 7). Interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, where the validity of a show cause notice is under challenge, is normally, limited to cases where the show cause notice as issued, is without jurisdiction or is tainted with malice, as these are matters which are required to be examined by the competent statutory authorities. It cannot be said that the show cause notice issued by the 2nd respondent on 3-1-2005 is without jurisdiction. No mala fides are attributed to the 2nd respondent. Since the applicability or otherwise of Section 65(19)(iv) of Finance Act, 2003 to the services rendered by the petitioner as Registrar and Transfer Agent during the period 1-7-2003 to 31-1-2004 is a mixed question of fact and law, this issue and the question whether the petitioner is entitled for exemption under Central Government Notification No. 25/2004-Service Tax dated 10-9-2004, are all matters for 2nd respondent to decide after taking into consideration the explanation furnished by the petitioner in this regard. The show cause notice issued by the 2nd respondent does not call for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.(Para 11,12). 

  • STO 2005 CESTAT 369
  • Service Tax: Business auxiliary services: Demand: Under the alleged franchisee agreement, the appellants are rendering service to their principal by collecting blood samples and after carrying out some procedural treatment, transmitting the same to them. There is prima facie, no any illegality in the impugned order.(Para 3).

    Pre-deposit ordered.

  • STO 2004 CESTAT 113
  • Service Tax: Services of consulting engineer: Demand: Royalty received is not liable for service tax. In view of the fact that service tax on intellectual property services (royalty etc.) has come under the service tax for the first time in the budget of 2004 only. Matter remanded for reconsideration(Para 4).

  • STO 2004 CESTAT 87
  • Import of Service: Rule 6(1) of the Service Tax was enacted with effect from 28-2-1999, therefore, even there is a liability on the part of the appellants to have discharged the obligations under the Service Tax Law for the period prior to 28-12-1999, the appellants cannot be found to be having any intention of misleading the Department and therefore the charges of suppression with an intention to evade payment of tax cannot be invoked.

    Appellants are not required to discharge any service as consulting engineers under the provisions of the Service Tax Law and/or required to file declaration or have any application for discharge of liability to duty. They are, therefore, not liable for any penalty in terms of Section 76.

    News Related

  • No dual-tax burden on job work manufacturing
  • Computerised embroidery work on job work basis is not taxable
  • Separating 'Business Auxiliary Services' Vs 'Business Support Service'
  • Commissions paid to directors not taxable
  • Lottery for Lottery Operators: Supreme Court says Lottery Tickets are not "Goods" : No Service Tax under BAS
  •  
     

    www.centralexciseonline.com

     


    www.taxolegal.com


    Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape


    www.customsindiaonline.com
    Home | Mission | Contact Us | Acknowledgements © 2009 Copyrights, All Rights Reserved. 
    Disclaimer Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order and other contents correctly, the access and circulation is subject to the condition that EASY SERVICETAXONLINE DOT COM PRIVATE LIMITED is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions. The Site is constantly updated and any or all of the contents are liable to be modified, altered, deleted or replaced. EASY SERVICETAXONLINE DOT COM PRIVATE LIMITED is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone whether directly or indirectly  due to any modification , alteration, addition, deletion or replacement of any of the contents.

    Copyright : Reproduction of news articles, photos, or any other content in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of  EASY SERVICETAXONLINE DOT COM PRIVATE LIMITED is prohibited.Do not copy contents of this site . All pages are protected by COPYSCAPE. Plagiarism will be detected by COPYSCAPE.