9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oan fee, examining the scope of service rendered by the appellant, we find this category has no connection to such services. There is neither an advisory role nor auxiliary financial service with reference to investment etc. We further note that the impugned order mentioned about “other financial services” which were added under the category of BOFS only w.e.f. 18.04.2006. Even such “other financi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate Present for the Respondent: Mr. Ranjan Khanna, D.R. PER: B.RAVICHANDRAN The appeal is directed against the order dated 08.04.2011 of Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi-I. The appellants are engaged in providing various taxable services. The dispute in the present case relates to amount received on account of (a) arranging loans for various clients and receiving a loan fee for such services, (b) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sidered as commission agents and they are not promoting anybodies business. 3. The ld. AR submitted that the appellate authority examined the issue and he reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. On the first issue, we find that the Revenue seems to confirm the demand on the loan fee received by the appellant for arranging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vices" appear to have no application to the present case. 5. Regarding the appellants tax liability under BAS for the amount of brokerage received for distributing IPO for clients, we find the same cannot be covered under Business Auxiliary Service during the relevant time. 6. A reference can be made in this regard to the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Consortium Securities Pvt. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
