Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 894 - AT - Service TaxBusiness Support Service - case of the revenue is that under the concession agreement, the appellant provided various facility in relation to commerce to the concessionaire which fall under the category of Business Support Service - whether the service provided by the appellant to the concessionaire is classifiable as Business Support Service and liable for service tax during the relevant period or otherwise? - Held that: - As per the plain reading of the definition, it can be seen that any service provided in relation to business or commerce is a support service of business or commerce. In the present case the concessionaire is solely engaged in the commerce i.e. sale of their goods in the premises of the appellant. The appellant provides their branded store duly air-conditioned, with adequate ambience, lighting, common security, various sales schemes to attract the customer. These facilities contribute in the sale of the goods of the concessionaire from the stores of the appellant. Therefore the service of the appellant clearly covered in the first clause of the definition of support services of business or commerce. The scope of this service is not limited but very wide. In our view any service which support the operation of business and commerce of the client covers under the business support services, if it is not specified under the specific classification. As regard consideration, from the concession agreement, it can be seen that the consideration is either in the form of percentage of sale or if the total amount, as per the percentage does not meet to the minimum guaranteed amount then irrespective of percentage the fixed minimum guaranteed amount is charged by the appellant from the concessionaire. This further establish that the arrangement is not of sale-purchase of goods between concessionaire and the appellant but of service. Extended period of limitation - penalty - Held that: - before 1-6-2007 appellant neither declared their service nor filed any ST-3 returns declaring the service of Business Support Service, therefore department was completely kept in dark about the provision of service under the category of Business Support Service, therefore there is clear suppression of facts on the part of the appellant, extended period was correctly invoked - penalties imposed are also legal and correct, which do not require any interference. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|