9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bers and the bench relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand in the case of Ranchi Club vs. Chief Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi - [2012 (6) TMI 636 - Jharkhand High Court] and also the judgment of the Honble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sports Club of Gujarat vs. Union of India - [2013 (7) TMI 510 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/85371/2015 - Final Order No. A/2796/2015-WZB/STB - Dated:- 19-8-2015 - M. V. Ravindran, Member (J) And CJ Mathew, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri Neerav Mainkar, Adv For the Respondent : Shri A B Kulgod, Asstt. Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per M V Ravindran This appeal is directed aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is an association of bankers and the banks are the members of the association and charges fees from them for conducting various activities for them. He would submit that the issue is no more res integra as the Tribunal in a similarly placed assessee's case, in the case of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry vs. Commissioner of Service Tax and Electronics and Computer Software Export Promotion Council vs. Commissioner of Service Tax reported in - 2014-TIOL-701-CESTAT-DEL has held that the services rendered would not fall under the category of taxable services as the members cannot be categorised as clients to whom services are provided. 4. Learned Departmental Representative reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the services which are rendered by the appellant are for their own member banks. The services which are rendered are more or less in consonance with the Rules of the appellant as published from time-to-time. Secondly, the learned counsel was correct in bringing to our notice that in a similarly placed case, Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, were served with a show cause notice by the authorities which reached the Tribunal, which was decided on 08/04/2014. The Principal Bench after considering the various submissions made by both the sides and also considering the law and the definition, has held as under: 24. On the analyses above, we hold: (a) That the appellants FICCI and ECSEPC are engaged in activiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g part of the post amendatory period omits to allege FICCIs liability to tax on the basis of the amended provisions and thus there is denial of due process; and (f) Invocation of the extended period of limitation for initiation of proceedings against both the appellants, to the extent the extended period is invoked and the confirmation of penalties, is unjustified and unsustainable. 8. We also find that this bench in the case of Matunga Gymkhana - 2015-TIOL-108-CESTAT-MUM has held the same view that any association is not providing services to its own members and the bench relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand in the case of Ranchi Club vs. Chief Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, Ranchi - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
