2018 (3) TMI 696

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ma, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri. Tarun Kumar, AR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein demand of service tax has been confirmed under the category of Business Auxiliary Services for the activity of promoting the business of banks. 2. The fact of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the activity of introducing clients to the bank .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he CBEC Circular No. 87/05/06-ST dated 6.11.2006, therefore, they are not liable to pay service tax. It is further contended that there is a calculation error while calculating the total amount of services provided by them, therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. AR reiterated findings of the impugned order and admitted that if there is any calculation erro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . In that circumstances, we hold that activity undertaken by the appellant is appropriately classifiable under business auxiliary services for promoting business of banks, therefore, they are liable to pay service tax. 7. We further take note of the fact that the figures have taken for calculation of demand on the basis of bank's statement of the appellant and as per the bank's statement, there a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X