9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being a sub-broker are obviously covered by the definition of stock broker and even as sub-broker, their activity in connection with sale or purchase of securities listed on stock exchange for their clients has to be treated as service provided by stock broker in connection with sale or purchase of securities covered by Section 65(105)(a) - Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Sharma & Co. v. C.C.E., Chandigarh reported in (2010 -TMI - 78818 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) - Decided in favor of the assessee by way of remand to Commissioner for de novo decision - ST/150/2011 - ST/586/2011(PB) - Dated:- 21-9-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Alok Kothari, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued to the appellant for demand allegedly short paid service tax amounting to Rs. 3,99,081/- alongwith interest on the amount of brokerage/commission received by the appellant from their broker and also imposition of penalty on the appellant under Section 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 4-3-2010 by which the service tax demand, as made in the show cause notice, was confirmed against the appellant alongwith interest and beside this, penalty of Rs. 3,99,081/- each was imposed under Section 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals), the order of the Assistant Commissioner was upheld vide order-in-appeal dated 19- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant s activity as sub-broker during the period of dispute could not be charged to service tax again and in this regard he relies upon the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Sharma Co. v. C.C.E., Chandigarh reported in 2010 (20) S.T.R. 309 (Tri. - LB), that in this judgment the Larger Bench of the Tribunal had held that sub-broker cannot be denied to be set off against the ultimate service tax liability of the stock broker, if the stock broker is liable to service tax for the self same transaction, but such set off depends upon facts and circumstances of each case and subject to verification of evidence as well as the rules made under the law w.e.f. 10-9-2004, that this judgment of the Larger ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale or purchase of securities listed on a recognised stock exchange. The appellant, being a sub-broker are obviously covered by the definition of stock broker and even as sub-broker, their activity in connection with sale or purchase of securities listed on stock exchange for their clients has to be treated as service provided by stock broker in connection with sale or purchase of securities covered by Section 65(105)(a). In view of this, in our view, their activity cannot be said to be Business Auxiliary Service provided to the main broker. Since, the appellant have to be treated as a broker and the service provided by them is service of stock broker in connection with sale or purchase of securities listed on stock exchange for their clie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
