TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal has examined this issue and held that such services were covered under the scope of the definition of “Business Auxiliary Service” prior to 10-9-2004. Extended period of limitation - The period involved in this appeal is prior to 10-9-2004. The Show Cause Notice was issued on 31-7-2007. This Appellant is paying service tax from 10-9-2004. As can be seen from the discussions above the matter was being interpreted by judicial forums in different ways as may be seen from the decisions quoted by the Appellants. - Higher Courts have been taking the view that in such situations the extended period of time cannot be invoked for raising demand - Appeal is allowed - ST/990/2010 - ST/600/2011(PB) - Dated:- 22-11-2011 - S/Shri D.N. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der : Business Auxiliary Service means any service in relation to :- (a) Promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to the client; or (b) Promotion or marketing of service provided by the client; or (c) Any customer care service provided on behalf of the client; or (d) Any incidental or auxiliary support service such as billing, collection or recovery of cheques, accounts and remittance, evaluation of prospective customer and public relation services, and includes service as a commission agent, but does not include any information technology service. 4. The entry for Business Auxiliary Service from 10-9-2004 is as under : Business Auxiliary Service means any service in rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants filed an appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected their appeal. The Appellant is challenging this order by Commissioner (Appeals). 6. The main contention of the Appellant is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not dealt with various issues raised by the Appellant in their First Appeal. The Counsel submits that the First Appellate Authority did not deal with the following matters raised by him, namely,- (i) The Appellant had claimed exemption under Notification 25/2004-S.T. (ii) The Appellant had claimed Exemption under Notification 14/2004-S.T. which was also not considered. 7. He also submits that Commissioner (Appeals) did not appreciate the following grounds properly,- (i) The demand was time bar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the decision of the Tribunal in Bridgestone Financial Services v. CST - 2007 (8) S.T.R. 505. 9. Now the question to be examined is whether Notification 14/2004-S.T. or Notification 25/2004-S.T. provide any exemption to the tax liability of the Appellant. Notification 14/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004 reads as under : In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 93 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts taxable service provided to a client by a commercial concern in relation to the business auxiliary service, in so far as it relates to,- (a) procurement of goods or services, which are inputs for the cli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is no contract between the loan seekers and the Appellant. Contract is between Appellant and the Banks. So the activity does not fall under item (c). So the Appellant is not eligible for exemption under the above notification. 11. Now the scope of Notification 25/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004 is to be examined. This notification reads as under : In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 93 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts that portion of the value of following taxable services, namely- (a) services provided to a customer, by a commissioning and installation agency in relation to erection; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or Vehicles Act, 1988 or rules made thereunder, in relation to a tour; and (h) service provided to a policy holder, by an insurer carrying on life insurance business in relation to the risk cover in life insurance, from the whole of service tax leviable thereon under Section 66 of the said Act, which is received by the service provider prior to the 10th day of September, 2004. 12. This notification has two peculiarities as compared to usual exemption notifications. Firstly this notification is for value of taxable services rather than the service itself. Secondly the notification provides exemption for value of services received prior to 10-9-2004. 13. The appellants are contesting that they are eligible for exemption as per clau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
