9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 975X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are that the appellant is registered under Finance Act, 1984 and is providing taxable services under the category of banking and other financial services during the relevant period and has been paying Service Tax on all the taxable services and filing their Returns regularly. The appellant bank acts as an agent of RBI and carried out various Government transactions involving receipt and payment on behalf of the Central and State Governments and is receiving commission known as 'agency commission' from RBI for carrying out these transactions. The Government departments are not maintaining any account with the bank. In respect of pension payments, the bank parts its funds first and a reimbursement is claimed from the corresponding Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the same from RBI. Thereafter, the Additional Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dated 06.02.2017 confirmed the demand and appropriated the tax amount and dropped the proceedings relating to interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, the Department filed appeal before the Commissioner (A) for demanding interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act and also for imposing of penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act. The Commissioner (A) allowed the Department appeal partly by upholding the demand of interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 and dropped the penalty by giving the benefit under Section 80 of the Finance Act. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. 4. Learned Consultant, Mr. S. Ananthan, appeari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shree Infra Tech v. CCE, Tiruchirapalli, 2014 (10) TMI 517. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that as per the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. State Bank of Patiala (supra), the appellant being agent of the RBI is not liable to Service Tax on Government business. It is pertinent to reproduce the relevant finding of the Larger Bench which is recorded in Para 7.7 and is reproduced herein below. "We may also look at the present controversy from another angle. State Bank of Patiala has been appointed by RBI as its agent under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
