2014 (1) TMI 1248 - AT - Service Tax

Order beyond the scope of Show Cause Notice (SCN) - Stock Broker Services - Stock Exchange Service - Held that - As the show-cause notices were issued demanding duty as provider of Stock Broking Services, whereas the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand as provider of Stock Exchange Service, which is a different and distinct service. In these circumstances, we find merit in the contention of the appellant that the impugned order is beyond the scope of show-cause notice - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Scope of show-cause notice in relation to Stock Broker Service and Stock Exchange Service under the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:
The case involved an application for waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax, interest, and penalties amounting to Rs. 1,04,75,937. The proceedings were initiated based on three show-cause notices alleging that the applicant, a provider of Stock Broker Services, had not declared certain charges in the assessable value of the service. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Service Tax, considering the services provided as Stock Exchange Services rather than Stock Broker Services. The applicant contended that the adjudication order exceeded the scope of the show-cause notice as Stock Broker Service and Stock Exchange Service are distinct services under the Finance Act, 1994.

Upon reviewing the show-cause notice and the adjudication order, the Tribunal noted that the demand in the notice was based on the applicant's failure to declare the value of services provided as stock brokers and pay the corresponding Service Tax. However, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand under the category of Stock Exchange Service. The Tribunal referred to the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994, specifically Section 65(105)(a) for Stock Broker Service and Section 65(105)(zzzzg) for Stock Exchange Services, highlighting the differences in the definitions and taxable aspects of these services.

The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the impugned order went beyond the scope of the show-cause notice by treating the services as Stock Exchange Service instead of Stock Broker Service. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, waived the pre-deposit requirement of dues, and allowed the appeal. The stay petition was also disposed of accordingly. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court, providing relief to the appellant based on the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Finance Act, 1994.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues surrounding the interpretation of Stock Broker Service and Stock Exchange Service under the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the importance of aligning adjudication decisions with the scope of show-cause notices to ensure procedural fairness and legal accuracy in tax matters.