Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2013 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 794 - AT - Service TaxDemand of service tax - Renting of immovable property - Sale of space or time for advertisement - Club or Association Service - Amount received from BCCI as subsidy for various activities - Business support service - Penalty u/s 76, 77, 78 - Difference of opinion - matter referred to larger bench on the following issues: i) Whether the appellant, M/s. Vidarbha Cricket Association is liable to service tax on the services rendered to its members under ‘Club or Association Service' as held by the Member (Technical) on the ground that the appellant is not rendering any public service nor are they a charitable organization and the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 are not pari materia with Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 - OR - The appellant, M/s. Vidarbha Cricket Association is not liable to service tax under ‘Club or Association Service' as held by Member (Judicial) on the ground that the appellant is treated as a charitable organization under the Income Tax act, 1961 ii) Whether the appellant is liable to penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 in cases where the service tax demands have been confirmed invoking the extended period of time as held by Member (Technical) - OR - The appellant is not liable to penalty under the above provisions on the ground that there is no contumacious conduct on the part of the appellant and the disputes had arisen as a matter of interpretation of the tax provisions, as held by Member (Judicial). iii) Is there any inherent contradiction in the waiver of penalty by Member (Judicial) inasmuch as he has upheld the confirmation of demand of service tax invoking the extended period of time and the same pre-supposes suppression of facts on the part of the appellant whereas while waiving of the penalty, the learned Member (Judicial) has held that there is no contumacious conduct on the part of the appellant. Further for imposition of penalty under Sections 76 and 77 no mens rea is required and mere contravention of the statutory provisions would suffice. Referred to larger bench.
|