TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the above issue to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order. Health and fitness centre service - Held that: - appellant have been paying service tax under the category of club or association since 2005. It is the submission of the appellant that since this service was considered under the club or association, the same cannot be taxed under different category for the period prior to 16-6-2005, when services of club and association was brought under the tax net - adjudicating authority also directed to reconsider this issue on submission made by the appellant in this regard. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/130/10 & ST/445, 446/10 & ST/CO-100/11 - A/91073-91075/2017 - Dated:- 23-11-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member(Judici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f its sister concern. It undertaken the specific areas concerns and have been spared the requirement of recruiting its employees and have been served with the entire workmanship of the business by M/s. HDPL. Hence it was a service in the nature of the business assistance to its sister concern as defined under Business Auxiliary Service under Section 65(105)(zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994 which has come into effect from 1-7-2003. Accordingly in respect of services provided by M/s. HDPL to their group company construed as services provided by M/s. HDPL to the group companies hence the consideration received from the group companies was held to be liable for service tax in the impugned order. Accordingly demand of ₹ 7,83,25,785/- was co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affirmed by Hon ble Madras High Court [2014 (33) STR (137)]. (c) Similar issue had come up before this Tribunal in the case of Reliance ADA Group Pvt. Ltd. [2016 TIOL 603 CESTAT MUM - wherein the Tribunal held that sharing of costs within the group companies is not towards any rendition of services and therefore the same is not liable to service tax prior to 01.05.2011 under the category Business Support Services . (d) Further the present issue is squarely covered by the case of M/s. Raheja Universal [2017-TIOL 2275 CESTAT MUM] wherein the demand was raised by the department under Business Auxiliary Services for the expenses being shared by the Appellant with its group companies. The Tribunal held that under Finance Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ording to which it is mandatory on the part of the builder to maintain the building. The Tribunal held that builder has engaged various service providers for undertaking such works and payment made to such service providers was taken as re-imbursement from the flat owner Accordingly, the Appellant is not liable to for payment of service tax under the category of 'Management, Maintenance or Repair Service'. 3. On the other hand, Shri. M.P. Damle, Ld. Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that appellant is a group company to whom the services were provided are distinct and independent entity therefore there is relationship of service provider and serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d(Supra) the demand was set aside only on the ground that manpower was deputed to the group companies. In the fact of the present case the adjudicating authority has not gone into the constitution of the various so called group companies, therefore arriving at the conclusion whether there is relationship of service provider and service recipient between the appellant and group companies, the constitution of each company has to be ascertained. Merely going on the term Group Company , it cannot be concluded whether company is group company or otherwise. Share holding pattern submitted by the appellant is reproduced below: From above share holding pattern, it is observed that in some companies share holding is less than 50%, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
