TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the MAT examination. We find there is no provision of service on behalf of any client. As such, we hold no service tax can be levied on the examination fee collected by the appellant from the students for MAT examination - demand not sustained. Manpower recruitment or supply agency service - Held that: - the appellants are collecting charges from the organizations and there is no public service involved in conducting examination for recruitment of personnel for various organizations which included commercial public sector undertakings. As such, we are of the opinion that the services rendered by the appellants are liable to be taxed under manpower recruitment or supply agency service - however, such demand has to be confirmed only for the normal period covered by both the show cause notices. As already noted, the second show cause notice also invoked extended period which is legally unsustainable - demand sustained for normal period. Intellectual Property Right Service - It is the case of the appellant that the said contents are copy right materials and, as such, are excluded from the purview of tax entry of “intellectual property right” - Held that: - the royalty payment is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agency Service for the period 2003-2004 to 2010-2011 and (d) Intellectual Property Right Service for the period 2004-2005 to 2010-2011. The show cause notices were adjudicated and vide the impugned order a total service tax demand of ₹ 25,52,78,952/- has confirmed. An amount equal to the tax was imposed as penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Further, penalty of ₹ 25,000/- was imposed on the appellant under Section 77 of the Act. Out of this confirmed tax liability ₹ 24,22,08,297/- is relatable to service tax under Business Auxiliary Service. ₹ 69,47,830/- is attributable to Club or Association Service. The remaining amount is attributable to other two services. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted mainly on the following grounds : (a) the demand under the category Club or Association Service is not sustainable. Any service by the appellant to its Members is to be treated as service to self and there is no two separate entities a provider or a recipient of any service. Reference was also made to Section 96J introduced in Finance Act, 1994 for non-liability of service tax under this category till 31/03/2008. Reliance was place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xtended period of time. The demands for extended period are not sustainable. The penalties also are not sustainable. 3. The learned AR reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the appellants did not provide the details called for, in time. The reasons for confirming demands were elaborated in the impugned order. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. We take up the tax liability of the appellant, service categorywise. The first issue is regarding liability of the appellant under the category of Club or Association Service. The Original Authority reproduced the legal provisions and held that the subscription fee recovered by the appellant is squarely covered by the definition of taxable service. He distinguished the favourable decisions relied upon by the appellant. In this connection, we note that the service tax liability under this category has been examined by various Hon ble High Courts and this Tribunal. It is by now a settled principle that the services provided by the Club or Association to its members would not amount to service provided to another. In this regard, we refer to the decisions of Hon ble Jharkhand High Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned by the student, as certified by the appellant help the students to get admission in the management institute. It helps the management institute also in selecting the right students for their course. The appellant is not acting on behalf of anybody while conducting the MAT examination. We find there is no provision of service on behalf of any client. As such, we hold no service tax can be levied on the examination fee collected by the appellant from the students for MAT examination. There is another small part of consideration which is sought to be taxed under BAS. Some of the management institute advertised their institutions or courses in the MAT bulletins, published periodically, by the appellant. Some of the institutes seek data pertaining to students who appeared for the MAT examination and the data is provided by the appellant for a consideration. Even in respect of these amounts received, we find the appellant is not acting on behalf of any client and the elements for taxable service as listed under BAS are not available in the type of transactions between the institutes and the appellant. As recorded above, the appellants designed and conducted MAT examination and this i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ious organizations. Admittedly, the appellants are collecting charges from the organizations and there is no public service involved in conducting examination for recruitment of personnel for various organizations which included commercial public sector undertakings. As such, we are of the opinion that the services rendered by the appellants are liable to be taxed under manpower recruitment or supply agency service. However, we note that such demand has to be confirmed only for the normal period covered by both the show cause notices. As already noted, the second show cause notice also invoked extended period which is legally unsustainable. Even for the first show cause notice considering the amendments carried out in the tax entry and interpretation issue involved, it is apparent that there could be a bonafide belief regarding non-liability to tax of the appellant on this account. 7. The appellants also contested their tax liability under IPR services. Admittedly they received royalty amount for publishing journal Indian Management . The appellants provided contents for the said journal. It is the case of the appellant that the said contents are copy right materials and, as su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
