TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the provision of a service on behalf of the borrower from whom the appellant receives consideration, the activities of the appellant are outside the ambit of “business auxiliary service” - appellant are not liable to service tax - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/1610/2011-ST [DB] - ST/A/53948/2017 -CU[DB] - Dated:- 6-6-2017 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Present for the Appellant : Mr. Rinki Arora, Advocate. Present for the Respondent : Mr. Sanjay Jain, D.R. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran The appeal is against order dated 05.08.2011 of Commissioner (Appeals-I), Jaipur. The appellants are engaged in arranging loan for various persons from m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business auxiliary service in terms of Section 65 (19) of the Finance Act, 1994. We note that similar set of facts came up for consideration by the Tribunal in Fulchand Tikamchand Vs. CCE C, Nagpur 2016 TIOL-502-CESTAT-MUM . wherein the Tribunal held as below:- 8. It is seen from the description of the activity that the appellant does not enter into any contract, written or implied, with either the financier or the borrower; nor is there any responsibility cast upon the appellant in the event of default on the part of financier or the borrower. Accordingly, the appellant fails the test of description as agency or agent for classification as commission agent under section 65(19) of Finance Act, 1994. There is no force in the argu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In view of an equation that is devoid of an agency relationship with the financier and rules out the provision of a service on behalf of the borrower from whom the appellant receives consideration, the activities of the appellant are outside the ambit of business auxiliary service. 5. We find that the ratio followed by above decision is applicable to the present case. Accordingly, we hold that the impugned order is not sustainable and the appellants are not liable to service tax. Regarding the denial of cenvat credit, the ld. Counsel for the appellant did not press for their case, as they are not able to produce the connected documents. Accordingly, the impugned order relating to cenvat credit will stand. 6. The appeal is disposed o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
