2022 (1) TMI 1124 - AT - Service Tax

Levy of Service tax - Club or Association Services - relation of service provider and service recipient exists between the Club/Associate and its members or not - HELD THAT - The case of the appellant is squarely covered by the decision in SPORTS CLUB OF GUJARAT LTD VERSUS UNION OF INDIA 3 2013 (7) TMI 510 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT and other decisions passed by this Bench and coordinate benches of the CESTAT, where it was held that Section 65(25a), Section 65(105) (zzze) and Section 66 as incorporated / amended to the extent that the said provisions purport to levy service tax in respect of services purportedly provided by the petitioner club to its members, to be ultra vires. The impugned order does not survive in the light of the decisions cited as the services rendered by the Club to its members are held to be service rendered to themselves and no such relation of service provider and service recipient exists between the Club/Associate and its members.

Summary

Issues:
- Appellants providing services under "Club or Association Services" and "Mandap Keeper Services"
- Allegation of services provided under the mentioned categories
- Confirmation of demand on "Club or Association Services" by original authority
- Dropping of demand on "Mandap Keeper Services"
- Appeal against the order

Analysis:
The case involved the appellants registered under "Club or Association Services" facing allegations of providing services falling under this category and "Mandap Keeper Services." The original authority confirmed the demand on "Club or Association Services" but dropped the demand on "Mandap Keeper Services," leading to the initiation of an appeal. The learned Counsel for the appellant argued that the issue was settled by various judgments, including Sports Club of Gujarat Ltd. Vs UOI, Ranchi Club Ltd. Vs CC of CE & ST, and others, emphasizing that the services provided to the members were not in the capacity of service provider and service recipient.

Upon considering the arguments and records, the Tribunal found that the case of the appellant was squarely covered by the cited judgments and decisions of the CESTAT benches. The Tribunal concluded that the services provided by the Club to its members were deemed as services rendered to themselves, negating the existence of a service provider-service recipient relationship between the Club/Association and its members. Consequently, the impugned order was deemed unsustainable in light of the established legal precedents and decisions, leading to the allowance of the appeal with any consequential relief as per the law.

In summary, the Tribunal's decision was based on the established legal principles and precedents, determining that the services provided by the appellants to their members did not constitute a service provider-service recipient relationship, ultimately leading to the allowance of the appeal and providing relief to the appellants as per the law.