Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2013 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 366 - AT - Service TaxResearch fee - service tax on sharing of expenses - inclusion in value Held that:- When a service provider charges a consideration, he takes into account all the expenses incurred by him and includes an element of profit thus expenses are an integral part of the consideration charged - It may also happen that when the market is down the service provider may not be able to make any profit but may be rendering the service at a loss - that does not mean that the amount received is not a consideration for the services rendered - Service tax is not a tax on income or profits but a tax on provision of service - Whatever amount is charged for such provision service tax is payable irrespective of whether any profit is made by the service provider in the said transaction. Market Research Services assesse contended that the service provided does not come under the category of Market Research Services' as they do not pertain to any product, service or utility - Held that:- Research on equity is a product research - the term Market Research Agency was defined in section 65(69) We are of the view the equity research undertaken by the appellant falls within the scope of this definition and accordingly - appellant conducted equity research and prepared reports on the financials of the companies listed in the stock exchanges and the stock market performance of equity shares of such companies - Equities definitely come under the categories of products and considered as goods under the Sale of Goods Act, 1934 the appellant is prima facie liable to pay service tax on the said activity. Period of limitation The assesse contended that the show cause notice for demand of service tax for the period October, 2000 to March, 2003 has been issued only in March, 2005 and hence the demand is time barred Held that:- It is the date of knowledge that is relevant for computing the time limit limitation period is within one year from the date of knowledge It is on record that the appellant did not inform the department of the activities undertaken in this regard any time and only in March 2004 and September 2004 they informed the activities undertaken by them to the department subsequent to the department initiating investigation on the activities of the appellant court relied on the judgement of NIZAM SUGAR FACTORY Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, A. P. (2006 (4) TMI 127 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA). Waiver of pre- deposit 50% of service tax demand ordered to be pre-deposited - stay granted partly.
|