9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he aforesaid decisions and it has been held that the statutory charges such as NSDL and CSDL fee collected by the Depository Participants from customers and deposited with the Depositories (NSDL and CSDL) are not susceptible to service tax. These charges have a nexus or connection with the depository services and the respondent is not benefited out of collection of such fees as such fees are collected and deposited with the depositories. This is what has been held by the Tribunal in SAURIN INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS C.S.T. -SERVICE TAX AHMEDABAD [ 2023 (1) TMI 454 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] and LSE SECURITIES LTD. VERSUS CCE [ 2012 (6) TMI 364 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] . It is not possible to accept the contention advanced on behalf of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ative of the department cannot be accepted. There is no merit in the appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. - MR. DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND MR. P. V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Ms. Jaya Kumari, Authorized Representative of the Department Mr. B. L. Narsimhan Mr. Ashutosh Choudhary, Advocates for the Respondent ORDER This appeal has been filed by the Department to assail the order dated 29.11.2016 passed by the Commissioner dropping the proceedings initiated against Religare Broking Limited [the respondent] through the show cause notice dated 21.10.2011. 2. The respondent is engaged in the business of trading of securities as a stock broker and is a registered member of the National Stock Exchange and Bomb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsed by the respondent. 6. Pursuant to the audit objections, four show cause notices were issued to the respondent, which were adjudicated by a common order, whereby the proposed demand in all the show cause notices with respect to the following issues were dropped: i. Non-payment of service tax on NSDL and CSDL fee paid to Depositories; ii. Non-payment of service tar under reverse charges basis on the expenses reimbursed to the representative liaison offices located outside India; and iii. Non-payment of service tax on delayed payment charges; iv. Non-payment of service tax on services rendered to Jammu and Kashmir clients through its sub brokers in Jammu and Kashmir; v. Inadmissible CENVAT Credit on account of medical in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectronic Access to Securities Information (EASI) provided by CDSL (Central Depository Services (I) Ltd.) is liable to Service Tax under Banking and other Financial Service under section 65(105)zm. I find that this circular reiterates what was clarified vide Circular 50/11/2002-Service Tax , dated 18.12.2002. xxxxxxxxxxx (b) I thus find that the net result of this Circular insofar as the taxability of depository charges is concerned is that it classifies the activity under banking and other financial service . There is no other reference in this circular which makes the entire NSDL/CDSL fees taxable retrospectively. I am thus inclined to conclude that the demand on this issue is not sustainable. 9. The contention of Ms. Jaya Kumar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the depositories. This is what has been held by the Tribunal in Saurin Investments and LSE Securities. 12. It is not possible to accept the contention advanced on behalf of the department that the circular dated 23.08.2007 is retrospective in nature. The said Circular supersedes all the past Circulars, clarifications and communications on all technical issues. The said Circular brought certain transaction within the ambit of the service tax. It, therefore, restricts the benefits avaialbe to the assessee in terms of the past Circulars and Clarifications. Therefore, the Circular dated 23.08.2007 is oppressive in nature and it is a settled principal of law that an oppressive Circular should be given only prospective effect. 13. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le as there is no relationship of service provider and service recipient in the transaction and it cannot be said that the said offices were rendering any service to the respondent. 16. This issue has been decided by Courts in various cases. Thus, the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the representative offices located outside India with respect to rent, professional services, salaries of employees can by no stretch of imagination be equated as consideration to any service rendered to the respondent by the representative offices. Therefore, the reimbursements made to representative offices located outside India is not leviable to service tax. 17. The Commissioner has relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in Milind Kulkarni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
