TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t includible in the taxable value for charging Service Tax Business Auxiliary Service - incentive/ commission amounts received by the appellant towards services rendered as Registrar for IPOs - Held that: - Such amounts have been charged to service tax under a new service, "[registrar to an issue]" w.e.f. 01/5/2006. In the impugned order such charges have been levied to service tax under Business Auxiliary Service for the period prior to 01/5/2006. We find no justification for such demands. It is fairly well settled that when a new service is introduced from a particular date, the same activity cannot be charged to service tax prior to that date. The only exception could be if the new service is carved out of an existing service - the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een made under stock broker services. These are towards transaction charges received for the period prior to 16/5/08. These charges were made specifically taxable under stock exchange services w.e.f. 16/5/08 consequently they have argued that for the period prior to this, no service tax can be levied under stock broker services. They have relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of LSE Securities Ltd. vs. CCE, Ludhiana reported in 2013 (29) S.T.R. 591 (Tri. - Del.), (ii) the impugned order has confirmed a demand of ₹ 71,92,261/- under banking and other financial services. The demand has been confirmed on the charges received by the appellant towards delayed payments by the investors. Such charges cannot be charged t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing services w.e.f. 16/5/08. An additional service was introduced to levy service tax on stock exchange services. The stock brokers carried out transactions of purchase and sale of securities on behalf of investors through either the Bombay Stock Exchange or National Stock Exchange. These stock exchanges in turn levy charges towards the transaction in securities undertaken by the stock brokers. These transaction charges are, in turn, levied by the stock exchanges on the stock brokers who carried out such transactions. The transaction carried out by the stock brokers are on behalf of the investors and consequently such charges are in turn recovered by the brokers from the investors. Since these are distinguished from the commission recovered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... establish that such receipts were in the nature of commission or brokerage or had the characteristic of such nature that was failed to be discharged. The character of commission or brokerage is remuneration for the service of stock broking provided by a stock broker to investors. Therefore, aforesaid charges realized by appellants were not being of commission or brokerage are not taxable and shall not form part of gross value of taxable service. On merit, all the appellants succeed on the fundamental principles of taxation. Therefore, other contentions on merit made in respective appeals are not considered in this order . (b) Bankina Other Financial Services :- The demand under the Banking and Other Financial Services have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stands clarified in favour of the appellant, we are of the firm opinion that the demand of service tax on this ground needs to be set aside. (c) Business Auxiliary Service :- A demand has been raised under Business Auxiliary Service on the incentive/ commission amounts received by the appellant towards services rendered as Registrar for IPOs. Such amounts have been charged to service tax under a new service, [registrar to an issue] w.e.f. 01/5/2006. In the impugned order such charges have been levied to service tax under Business Auxiliary Service for the period prior to 01/5/2006. We find no justification for such demands. It is fairly well settled that when a new service is introduced from a particular date, the same activity c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Ashok Deshpande. 5. It was urged that these two services came under the service tax net only with effect from 1-5-2006. My attention was drawn to the Finance Ministers speech and the Board's Circular issued on this aspect. Further reliance was placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore v. Ankit Consultancy Ltd. [2007 (6) S.T.R. 101 (Tri.-DeI.,)] wherein similar issue cropped up and the Tribunal has held that these services would not come within the category of I Business Auxiliary Service . 6. On a careful consideration of the matter, I find that these two services came into service tax net only with effect from 1-5-2006 and a demand to levy the service tax retrospectively ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
