TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion Service - Appellant submits that sometimes some seminars/workshops are not open to the general public and is only for members - HELD THAT:- When the appellant organizes meetings for their own members, it is not open to general public. However, the appellant is not providing any service in relation to organizing of conventions. In this case, the principle of mutuality as approved by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. Calcutta Club Ltd. [ 2019 (10) TMI 160 - SUPREME COURT] applies. Accordingly, no Service Tax is liable to be paid on the services rendered to their own members - the demand confirmed in the impugned order under Convention Service is not sustainable. Business Exhibition Service - Demand raised solely based on the gross figures available in the balance-sheet without giving any reason for the nature of the services rendered - HELD THAT:- The appellant contended that it is a settled position of law that onus of proving taxability is on the Revenue; tax has been demanded under Business Exhibition Service on the ground that it is not sponsorship service ; the Department needs to prove that the amount has been received from some business exhibito ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demands vide the impugned order, the appellant has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Regarding the demand of Service Tax confirmed against the appellant under the category of Club or Association Service , the appellant submits that they are a mutual organization and hence, no Service Tax is payable by them; to impose Service Tax liability, there must be two parties - one a service provider and other a service receiver; when service provider and service receiver are the same person, it is a 'self- service' and there is no tax on self-service. It is contended that principle of mutuality is squarely applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case and for applicability of service tax there should be transaction as against consideration; it is submitted that they do not get any consideration to provide service to its members, as whatever surplus is left belong to the member and is used for the benefit of the members; appellant and its members are not two different entities, but one and same. Accordingly, they submit that the demand of service tax made under the category of 'Club or Association Service' in the impugned order is not sustainable. 4.1 T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir own, they do not provide any service in relation to holding of a convention. Accordingly, they submit that the demand confirmed on this count in the impugned order is not sustainable. 5.2. It is submitted that some conventions organized by the appellant are open to general public. Any person interested in the subject matter of the convention can participate in the convention by paying a delegate fee . In this regard, the appellant contended that once a convention is open to general public, it is not a 'convention' within the meaning of convention under service tax law, and no demand can be raised on convention service. 5.3. The appellant further submits that they have not provided any service to anybody in relation to holding of any convention and have organized the convention for themselves, which does not fall under the definition of convention service. Being a member's organization, the members meet for annual general meeting to discuss various issues related to the organization, accounts etc; this meeting is not open to general public. However, the meeting is organized by CII for itself, and hence there is no question of demand of service tax under convention se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appeal documents. 10. Our observations on the demand raised and confirmed against the appellant on the following three services are as under: 10.1 Club or Association Service: Regarding the demand of Service Tax on Club or Association Service, we observe that the service in this case has been rendered by the appellant to their members. There is no service provider and service receiver exists in this case. When the service provider and service receiver are the same person, it is a 'self- service' and there is no tax on self-service. We agree with the contention of the appellant that the principle of mutuality applicable in this case and therefore, there is no liability to pay Service Tax in this case. 10.2. In support of their argument, the appellant cited the decision in their own case by CESTAT, Chandigarh in Service Tax Appeal No. 1207 of 2011 (supra). The relevant paragraph 9 of the said decision is reproduced hereunder: - 9. As the issue has already settled that no service tax is payable on membership subscription paid by the members of the appellant for providing services by the appellant to its members, therefore, we hold that the appellant is not liable to pay ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e them liable to pay service tax for providing a necessary infrastructure for conduct of the conventions. By no stretch of imagination, the appellant can be termed as a commercial concern as they are a body of the industry formed as a trust to protect the interest of industry. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that they are collecting certain sums for providing the infrastructure for holding conventions, they cannot be termed as a commercial concern to be liable to pay service tax for this activity. Moreover, we find that the conventions organized by the appellant is open to general public and any person interested in the subject matter of the convention can participate in the convention by paying a 'delegate fee'. Once the convention is open to general public, then it is not a convention within the meaning of 'Convention' under service tax law and consequently no demand of service tax can be raised on convention service. 24. As far as the demand of service tax of Rs. 6,23,871/ on annual general meeting under convention service, we find that this demand is not sustainable as the annual general meeting is organized for the members themselves as it is a members orga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the submissions made by the appellant. Accordingly, we hold that the appellant has not rendered 'Business Exhibition Service' and the demand confirmed in the impugned order on this count is not sustainable. 12.4 The appellant also submitted that the demand has been made only on the basis of the information available in their balance-sheet without giving any finding regarding the nature of the service rendered by them. They cited the decision of CESTAT, Chandigarh in their own case in Service Tax Appeal No. 2244 of 2012 (supra)wherein it has been held that demand cannot be raised solely on the basis of gross figures available in the balance-sheet. The relevant paragraph of the said order is reproduced below: - 25. As far as demand of service tax of Rs. 22,70,068/- based on differential amount under convention service is concerned, we are of the opinion that this demand is also not sustainable as the figures in the balance sheet reflects the income and expenditure of the organization and has nothing to do with the liability or payment of service tax. Service tax is paid on specific heading, based on invoices and not on the gross amount. The demand of department is solely b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
