9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plying the principle that any receipt other than brokerage or commission is not exigible to service tax under the category of stock broker service, the appellant cannot be saddled with the liability of service tax on the transaction charges. Delayed payment charges (DPC) - HELD THAT:- The appellant had made payments to Stock Exchanges on behalf of their clients who delayed the payments against their transactions of securities and the appellant charged the DPC from the said clients by making debit entries in their ledgers which cannot be termed as consideration for the service rendered - The learned Counsel for the appellant has also referred to a recent decision of the Mumbai Bench in M/S IIFL HOLDING LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of transaction charges and delayed payment charges - the impugned order set aside - appeal allowed. - HON BLE MS. BINU TAMTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And HON BLE MS. HEMAMBIKA R. PRIYA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri A.K. Batra, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri S.K. Meena, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER Binu Tamta The appellant has challenged the order in appeal number 54/ST/Appeal/DLH-IV/2013 dated 27.06.2013, whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the demand of service tax on transaction charges and delayed payment charges under the category of Stock Broker s Services and Banking Other Financial Services . 2. The appellant is engaged in trading of securities and is a r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicial pronouncements, the ratio thereof is squarely applicable in the present case, and the order is liable to be set aside. The learned Counsel relied on the following decisions : (i) Religare Securities Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi 2014 (36) STR 937 (Tri.-Del.); (ii) LSE Securities Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana 2013 (29) STR 591 (Tri. Del.); (iii) Monarch Research Brokerage Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmedabad 2021 (55) GSTL 357 (Tri.- Ahmd.); (iv) Indses Securities And Finance Ltd. Span Caplease Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. CST-Service Tax, Ahmedabad 2018 (2) TMI 569 CESTAT-Ahmedabad (v) VSE Stock Services Ltd. Vs. CCE ST, Vadodara-II 2014 (1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of taxable service provided by him. The test laid down was whether a receipt of stock broker is in the nature of commission or brokerage to levy service tax. Following the said decision, the Ahmedabad Bench in Indses Securities and Finance Ltd, Span Caplease Pvt. Ltd and others Vs. C.S.T. Service Tax Ahmedabad (supra), accepted the contention of the appellant that these charges are collected separately and in accordance with various statutory bodies regulations and are not retained by the stock brokers but deposited with the authorities concerned and hence such charges cannot form part of the taxable value. 7. In a recent decision in VSE Stock Services Ltd Vs. CCE ST, Vadodara (supra), the Tribunal considering the issue whether the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transaction charges. 9. We now come to the demand of service tax towards delayed payment charges (DPC). The learned Authorized Representative very fairly conceded that the issue is covered by the decisions of the Tribunal in favour of the appellant. The decision in Religare Securities Ltd. (supra), also followed the principle laid down in LSE securities Ltd. and on that basis concluded that DPC is not a commission/brokerage for sale/purchase of securities and hence there is no justification for inclusion of the same in the value of the services. To quote from the said decision : that such DPC collection has got nothing to do with the sale/purchase of the securities, a service which the appellant is rendering as a stock broker ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erating or refraining from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act. Here we find that the appellant had made payments to Stock Exchanges on behalf of their clients who delayed the payments against their transactions of securities and the appellant charged the DPC from the said clients by making debit entries in their ledgers which cannot be termed as consideration for the service rendered. 11. As we have decided the issue on merits in favour of the appellant, the other consequential issues of extended period of limitation, interest and penalty does not require any consideration although the same is covered by the observations made by the Tribunal in LSE Securities Ltd. that there persisted several confusion between ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
