TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 479/06-Cus(Br) - ST/227/2009(PB) - Dated:- 13-7-2009 - Mr. D.N. Panda, Judicial Member and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order Per D.N. Panda] - The issue involved in this appeal is whether the land, building as well as machinery leased out by M/s Banswara Syntex Ltd to M/s Banswara Fabrics Ltd shall be financial lease falling under the class other financial services under Section 65(12) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with the charging proviso under Section 65(105)(zm) of the said Act to levy service tax on the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the case suggest that the appellant had leased out its factory with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Services for which the Board has already issued clarification. According to the Board clarification in letter F.No.B.II/1/200-TRU dated 9.7.2001 not only Banking and Financial institutions providing leasing services are brought to the tax ambit but equally body corporates carrying out such activities are also brought to the purview of law. According to the meaning of body corporate, a public limited company shall also be falling under the defined category providing leasing service shall be liable to service tax. Present appellant is therefore, liable to pay service tax on the activity of other financial services which is leasing. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the record. 6. There is no difficulty to understand that Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing company or a financial institution or a non-banking financial company which came under the purview of law. Such essential ingredient is absent in the present case. 8. In the course of hearing, it was noticed that the Legislature intended to broaden the tax base bringing transfer of right to use tangible goods to the fold of law. This is appearing in Section 65(10)(zm) of Finance Act, 1994 which came into force w.e.f. 16.5.2008. Finding that there was no law to tax the transfer of right to use movables before 16.5.2008, even on such count also, the appellant is excluded from the purview of law. 9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the appeal of the appellants. 10. Learned DR brings to our notice that success in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
