9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 236 - AT - Service TaxBusiness auxiliary services - whether the appellant is required to discharge Service Tax liability on an amount received from M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited under the category of Business Auxiliary Service ? - M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited (MKCL) had appointed the appellant as Authorized Local Agency for promotion and development of computer training in the state of Maharashtra and responsibility as an Authorized Local Agency, is to promote and market the activities of M/s MKCL. Held that - the issue is no more res integra as this Tribunal in the case of Sunbeam Infocomm Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-II 2014 (8) TMI 783 - CESTAT MUMBAI in an identical issue has taken a view in favor of the assessee and held that These activities undertaken by the appellant would certainly come within clause (d) of the exemption Notification 14/2004-ST which is a service incidental or auxiliary to any activity specified in clauses (a) to (c) and clause (c) deals with provision of service on behalf of client - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Whether the appellant is required to discharge Service Tax liability on an amount received from M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service". Analysis: The judgment involves two appeals filed against orders passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-II. The main issue is whether the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax on the amount received from M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited for providing services under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service." The appellant was appointed as an Authorized Local Agency by M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited to promote and develop computer training in Maharashtra. The Tribunal referred to previous cases like Sunbeam Infocomm Pvt. Ltd. and Infosavant Technologies Ltd., where a similar issue was decided in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal found no reason to deviate from the precedent set in those cases and ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demands raised by the authorities. In the judgment, the Tribunal, consisting of Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. C.J. Mathew, considered the arguments presented by both sides and examined the records before making a decision. The Tribunal noted that the issue at hand had already been addressed in previous cases where a similar view was taken in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's role as an Authorized Local Agency for promoting and marketing M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited's activities did not attract Service Tax liability under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service." Therefore, based on the precedents and the facts of the case, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals filed by the appellant. In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI addressed the issue of Service Tax liability on amounts received by the appellant from M/s Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Limited. By considering previous decisions and the nature of the appellant's role as an Authorized Local Agency, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant and set aside the demands raised by the authorities. The judgment provides clarity on the interpretation of "Business Auxiliary Service" in such cases and upholds the appellant's position based on established legal principles and precedents.
|
