9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ancy Service/ Management or Business Consultancy Service as mentioned in para 9 above, and the services provided by the Appellant as discussed in the forgoing paras, the Appellants services come within the scope of Management or Business Consultancy Service. Thus, the Appellant contention that their services are primarily administrative in and they do not come within the scope of Management or Business Consultancy Service is not acceptable. There are no reason to differ with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) - the case law quoted by the appellant in the case of ELECTRICAL INSPECTORATE, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA VERSUS C. ST [ 2007 (10) TMI 137 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] was properly considered and rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is also found that the definition of Management Consultancy Service is comprehensive enough to cover any technical advice, assistance in relation to financial management which in this instance they were doing by identifying qualified farmers for disbursal of subsidy and were getting paid for these services to the State Government. That the amount for their services was being deducted and paid for eventually out of subsidy amount of farmers, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Show Cause notice dated 16.6.08 was issued to the appellants for rejection of the refund claim on the ground that (i) the service tax has been correctly paid under the Management Consultancy Service in accordance with law and there is no excess payment, so no refund is due. (il) As the refund claim for the period 1.4.05. to 05.05.07 was submitted only on 06.05.08, Refund claim of Rs.1,51,37,508/- for the period 1.4.05 to 31.3.07 is time barred as it was submitted more than I year after the date of payment of service tax, and (iii) No documentary evidence is produced by the Appellant showing that tax burden is not passed on to any other person in terms of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which is applicable to service tax matter in terms of Section 83 of the finance Act, 1994, 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Order-In-Appeal the appellant filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who after considering various submissions upheld the order of Adjudicating authority and rejected the appellant s appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) the appellants have filed present appeal mainly on the ground that the rejection of the refund claim for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als) in para Nos. 9.1 to para No. 10.4 reproduced below:- 9.1 A plain reading of the aforesaid definitions of Management Consultancy Service (upto 31.05.07) and Management or Business Consultancy Service (w.e.f. 01.06.07 onwards) shows that apart from renaming the service as Management or Business Consultancy Service [section 65(105)(r) ], the only change in the definition of the service w.e.f. 01.06.07 is that while earlier any services provided, either directly or indirectly, in connection with the Management of any Organization in different specified areas and other similar areas of Management were included in the definition, w.e.f. 01.06.07 onwards such services provided in connection with the Management of any Organization of Business are included in the definition. The different areas in connection with which the services provided are covered under the said taxable service in the period prior to 31.05.07 and post 01.06.07 as specified in the said definitions have remained unchanged. It is pertinent to note that services specified in the definition are not exhaustive but only illustrative, as both the definitions besides, mentioning the specified services also referre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the resolution dated 09.05.05 and the tripartite agreement between the farmers, GGRCL and the MIS supplier, it is observed that the Appellants are providing services like preparing of ready reckoner (jantri) for unit cost towards agriculture in consultation with experts (para 6 of resolution)-the unit cost would include the costs towards agriculture related services, administrative service, repairing of instrument, insurance etc.. getting survey conducted by the approved agencies for laying MIS Set on farm (para 8.2 of resolution), MIS management, analysis of soil and water cost (Para 8.3 of resolution), provide seeds, bio-fertilizer, anti-fungus medicines, manure of micro elements, gypsum etc. as per the specific demand of the farmers (para 8.3 of resolution) and also assist them in financial management in relation to installation of the MIS system in the farmers land by way of arranging loan from the banks, disbursal of govt. subsidy to the farmers, making complete payment to MIS Agencies through bank on behalf of the farmers, insurance of the MIS etc. For providing the said services, the appellants charged 5% of the subsidy from the farmers of the subsidy as (management) fee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce Act, 1994 and not relating to Technical Inspection and Certification Services. Though the Appellants are a joint venture set up by three state public sector units and function as nodal agency for implementation of uniform scheme for Micro Irrigation System in the state on behalf of Government of Gujarat, they cannot be equated to a Government department carrying out any statutory function as was the position in the cited case. Therefore, the decision cited by the appellants is not applicable to the present case. 10.4. In view of the discussion and findings above, the services proved by the Appellants are rightly covered under the definition of Management Consultancy Service (upto 31.05.2007) and Management or Business Consultancy Service (Post 01.06.2007) as defined in section 65 (65) of the Finance Act, 1994 and have correctly paid the service tax under the said category. Accordingly, the order of the Adjudicating Authority rejecting the refund claim on merits as correct and is sustainable in law. 5.2 We find no reason to differ with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). In the facts and circumstances of the matter the case law quoted by the appellant in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
