TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sale or purchase of agricultural produce. In other words, in respect of Commission Agent dealing with mutual funds, the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003 would apply only for the period prior to 9-7-2004. Since in the present case, the refund pertains to the period July, 2003 to September, 2004 as mentioned in the show-cause notice, it has to be held that for the period from 9-7-2004 to September, 2004, the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003 would not be available to the appellant and therefore, if any service tax has been paid on services rendered during the said period, the appellant will not be eligible for the benefit of refund. Appellant is eligible for refund of Service Tax period prior to 9-7-2004 in accordance with law. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a show-cause notice dated 24-6-2005 and thereafter, an order was passed by the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner rejecting the refund on the ground that the appellant is not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. The appellant preferred an appeal before the lower appellate authority, who vide the impugned order held that the appellant is eligible for the exemption under the said notification, in view of the fact that as per Section 65(50) of the Finance Act, 1994, goods has the meaning assigned to it in clause (7) of Section 2 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 and as per the said provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, goods means every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money; and includes stocks a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot promotion or marketing of goods. However, the Ld. AR fairly concedes that this Circular has been set aside by the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Karvy Securities Ltd. v. UOI, 2006 (2) S.T.R. 481 (A.P.) and the department has gone in appeal against said decision of the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court and the same has been admitted as reported in 2007 (8) S.T.R. J85 (S.C.). As regards the current status, the ld. AR submits that the matter is pending before the Hon ble Apex Court for decision. In view of the above, the ld. AR submits that the order of the lower appellate authority is not sustainable in law and needs to be set aside. 4. The Ld. Consultant for the appellant submits that as per the definition of goods in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agent dealing with mutual funds, the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003 would apply only for the period prior to 9-7-2004. Since in the present case, the refund pertains to the period July, 2003 to September, 2004 as mentioned in the show-cause notice, it has to be held that for the period from 9-7-2004 to September, 2004, the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003 would not be available to the appellant and therefore, if any service tax has been paid on services rendered during the said period, the appellant will not be eligible for the benefit of refund. The ld. Consultant for the appellant also appears to have made a submission before the adjudicating authority that in this case the services were rendered prior to 9-7-2004. However, this m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
