9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eof given in Section 65(19) of Finance Act, 1994 which includes service in relations to promotion or marketing of service. Further this issue is covered in favour of Revenue in the CESTAT Larger Bench decision in the case of M/s. Pagariya Auto Center [2014 (2) TMI 98 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)]. - Decided against the assessee. Waiver of penalty - Commissioner (Appeals) has categorically observed that there was no mens rea or intention on the part of the appellants to evade Service Tax which they had paid along with interest even before the issue of Show Cause Notice. It is pertinent to mention that the impugned order cannot be overruled merely because some other equivalent authority may have come to a different conclusion with regard to ext ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iable to Service Tax under Business Auxiliary Service and extended period was invocable due to wilful mis-statement/suppression of facts by the appellants. While original adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Service Tax on the entire amount along with interest and penalties the appellate authority came to a finding that the amounts received from M/s. Mahindra Mahindra Ltd. and M/s. Hero Honda Motors Ltd. were not liable to Service Tax but the amounts received as commission from banks and insurance companies were liable to Service Tax under Business Auxiliary Service because the same were received for services rendered in relation to marketing of their products as we evident from the facts available on record. The Commissioner (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly provided table space to their (i.e. banks and insurance companies ) representatives and that there was no suppression or wilful mis-statement on their part and therefore extended period cannot be invoked. The ld. DR reiterated the contentions contained in the Revenue s appeal. 4. We have considered the facts and submissions. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear finding based on documentary evidence that the commission received by the appellants from banks and insurance companies was in relation to marketing of their product. The appellants have not given any evidence to the contrary. The service rendered in relation to marketing of the products of banks and insurance companies is expressly covered under the cate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
