2021 (9) TMI 922

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... records before Hon ble President for constitution of Larger Bench. In view of the discussion, the findings and the answers given by the Larger Bench on the six issues, the impugned order dated July 27, 2015 passed by the Commissioner cannot be sustained and is set aside - Appeal allowed.
MR. DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND MR. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Ms. Madhumita Singh & Shri Sameer Sood, Advocates - for the appellant Dr. Radhe Tallo, Authorized Representative - for the Respondent ORDER This appeal has been filed to assail the order dated July 27, 2015 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals), Delhi1, by which the appeal was disposed of with a direction to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue of quantifi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant filed a detailed reply to the show cause notice and by an order dated 23.02.2014, the Commissioner confirmed the demand. 10. An appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), which appeal was rejected by order dated 27.07.2015. 11. The Division Bench in Kafila, while referring the matter to the Larger Bench, framed the following six issues: "(i) whether the Incentive received by service receiver from service provider, on appreciable performance, can be subjected to service tax? (ii) whether a demand can be confirmed without specifying the sub clause of BAS under which the activities are covered? (iii) whether demand of service tax can be confirmed under the taxable category of BAS in absence of three parties - service pro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... foresaid discussion and findings, the answers to the six issues that have been referred to the Larger Bench are as follows: First issue : the incentives received by a service recipient from a service provider cannot be subjected to levy of service tax; Second issue : This issue does not arise for consideration in this appeal as the show cause notice and the adjudicating order had confirmed the demand under section 65(19)(ii) of the Finance Act; Third issue : A passenger cannot be deemed to be an audience for the promotion of the business of CRS Companies; and Fourth, Fifth and Sixth issues : In view of the discussion and findings these issues do not arise for consideration and are, therefore, not being answered. 15. In view of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X