2016 (4) TMI 1308 - AT - Service Tax

Club or Association Services - penalty - Held that - the penalty issue cannot be decided without first deciding the appellant s liability to pay service tax - the present appeal requires to be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision alongwith the assessee s appeal filed against confirmation of demand of duty - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Confirmation of demand under Club or Association Services for the period April 2005 to March 2008.
2. Enhancement of penalty from ?100 to ?200 per day by Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the confirmation of demand under Club or Association Services for the period April 2005 to March 2008. The Tribunal noted that a demand of ?26,55,353 was confirmed against the appellant, and another demand of ?7,60,451 was also confirmed under the same category. The Tribunal set aside the demand in a previous appeal involving the same issue, following a precedent decision. Consequently, the present appeal was also allowed based on the earlier decision, indicating consistency in the Tribunal's approach.

2. The judgment further discusses the issue of enhancement of penalty by the Commissioner (Appeals) from ?100 to ?200 per day. The original Adjudicating Authority confirmed a demand of ?1,06,587, leading to appeals from both the appellant and the Revenue. While the Revenue's appeal for penalty enhancement was allowed, the appellant's appeal was not disposed of. The Tribunal opined that the penalty issue cannot be determined without first resolving the appellant's liability to pay service tax. As the appellant's appeal against the confirmed demand is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals), the Tribunal decided to remand the present appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision along with the appellant's appeal related to the demand of duty.

In conclusion, the judgment provides a detailed analysis of the issues concerning the confirmation of demand under Club or Association Services and the enhancement of penalty. It emphasizes the importance of consistency in decisions based on precedent and highlights the procedural requirement of resolving liability issues before determining penalties. The Tribunal's decision to remand the appeal for further consideration by the Commissioner (Appeals) demonstrates a commitment to a fair and thorough adjudication process.