TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lients. 2. Heard both sides and perused record. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant's club is a non-profit company registered under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. It is being pointed out that it is a members' club inasmuch as every member is a shareholder and every shareholder is a member. This is also being pointed out that the club is open only to its members and or to members of reciprocating or associate clubs. The contention is that the recipient of services from such a members' club are not clients and no tax is attracted, since service tax is in regard to the service rendered to a client. It is also being pointed out that the very issue had come up before the Hon'ble Calcutta High C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business of 'mandap keeper' as well as the members' club for the purpose of using the space for constructing or using it as 'mandap'. Therefore, apart from any other question possibility of double taxation cannot be ruled out. If I explain my first query as above it will be crystal clear that if a person being an owner of the house allows another to occupy the house for the purpose of carrying out any function in that house it will not be construed as transfer of property. But if such person calls upon a third party 'mandap keeper' to construct a 'mandap' in such house then in that case such 'mandap keeper' -can be able raise bill upon the user of the premises along with the service tax. Therefore, I cannot hold it good that members' club ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers by its club cannot be termed to be a letting out nor the members of the club using the facility of any portion of the premises for any function can be termed to be a client. The services rendered by any person to his client presupposes the element of commerciality and obviously this transaction must be involved with the third parties, as opposed to the members of the club. 17. Thus, I allow the writ petition consequently I set aside and quash the notices and the registration certificate." [2006 (3) S.T.R. 311 (Cal.) = 2005 (180) E.L.T. 18(Cal.)] 5. Thus, the issue in dispute in the present case remains answered in favour of the appellant club by the aforesaid judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta. Following them, the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
