Latest - TMI e-Newsletter
New User/ Regiser
2022 (9) TMI 1006 - Service Tax
Recovery of service tax directly from Senior Advocates for the legal services - relationship between a Senior Advocate and an advocate / firm as that of a client and counsel - effect of N/N.18/2016-ST dated 1.3.2016 (Annexure-3) and N/N. 9/2016-ST dated 1.3.2016 (Annexure-4) - HELD THAT:- It is evident that the Central Government, vide Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 exempted certain services from the ambit of Section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994. Serial No.6 of the said notification exempted services provided by an individual as an advocate or a partnership firm of advocates by way of legal services to an advocate or partnership firm of advocates providing legal services, any person other than a business entity or a business entity with a turnover up to Rupees ten lakh in the preceding financial year.
It is evident that both the amendments, i.e., amendment dated 01.03.2016 and 06.06.2016, are by way of substitution. Since both the amendments are by way of substitution and the amendment by way of substitution relates back to the original document, as has been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in ZILE SINGH VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [2004 (10) TMI 553 - SUPREME COURT] and GOVERNMENT OF INDIA VERSUS INDIAN TOBACCO ASSOCIATION [2005 (8) TMI 113 - SUPREME COURT], both the amendments by way of substitution of the provision as contained in the original notification will be deemed to have applicable with effect from the date of notification dated 20.06.2012 - Since both the amendments relate back to the original document, the demand notice issued by the authority concerned for payment of service tax on legal services provided by a Senior Advocate for the period from 01.04.2016 to 05.06.2016 is held to be not sustainable in the eyes of law.