Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2014 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2014 (8) TMI 1200 - HC - Service Tax


Issues Involved:
Interpretation of "Business Auxiliary Service" under the Finance Act, 1994 in relation to "Information Technology Service" and the applicability of service tax.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of "Business Auxiliary Service" and "Information Technology Service"
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against a demand for service tax as a Gold Diplomant Associate of a company, selling computer educational packages. The show cause notice demanded service tax for the period from 1-7-2003 to 31-3-2007 under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service." The appellant contended that the activity was exempt as "Information Technology Service" based on an explanation added to the Finance Act, excluding Information Technology Service from Business Auxiliary Service. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals filed by both the revenue and the assessee, leading to the present appeal.

Issue 2: Applicability of Service Tax
The Tribunal's order was challenged by the appellant, arguing that the activity carried out was not a Business Auxiliary Service but rather an Information Technology Service. The appellant emphasized the terminology used in the explanation to Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, which excludes Information Technology Service from Business Auxiliary Service. The Tribunal's failure to consider this expression was highlighted, leading to prejudice against the appellant. The Tribunal's decision was based on the promotion and marketing activities carried out by the appellant, concluding that they were providing Business Auxiliary Service and not Information Technology Service.

Judgment:
The High Court held that the Tribunal had erred in not considering the expression "or any other service primarily in relation to operation of computer systems" in the explanation to Information Technology Service. The matter was remitted to the Tribunal for a fresh decision after affording an opportunity of hearing to both parties. Consequently, all the appeals were allowed, the Tribunal's orders were set aside, and the matters were remitted for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates