Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 450 - CESTAT MUMBAILevy of service tax - Banking and other financial services - commission charged for providing ‘corporate guarantee’ to their customers - HELD THAT:- The decision in OLAM AGRO INDIA LTD. VERSUS C.C. E-DELHI-II [2018 (8) TMI 102 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] has established that commission earned by providing ‘corporate guarantee’ is taxable, as ‘business auxiliary service’, under section 65(105)(zzb) of Finance Act, 1994. The decisions of the Tribunal, in M/S BANK OF BARODA VERSUS CCE, JAIPUR-I [2014 (3) TMI 653 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] and in RADIOWANI VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, MUMBAI-I [2018 (6) TMI 928 - CESTAT MUMBAI], reinforce the imperative of certainty of tax, as reflected in the classification of service proposed by tax authorities in the show cause notice, and as the pivot for the fulcrum of adjudicatory competence. It can be gauged from the narrative of the impugned order that, initially, the tax authorities had the same inclination but, for unfathomable reasons, a different ‘taxable service’ was invoked for initiating recovery proceedings. Consequently, there was patent lack of certainty of tax in the mind of the show cause notice issuing authority. The impugned order has failed to set about determining the congruity of that facilitation within the definition of ‘taxable service’ in section 65(105)(zm) of Finance Act, 1994 - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|