Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cst, Delhi vs M/S Abn Amro Bank on 20 January, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110 066.
COURT NO. IV
Date of Hearing : 20.1.2011
Service Tax Appeal No. 201 of 2008 with Cross/244/2008
[Arising out of the Order-in-Original No. 66/VKG/CST/2007 dated 2.1.2008 passed by The Commissioner, Service Tax, New Delhi]
For Approval and signature :
Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see :
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of :
the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for
publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair :
copy of the order?
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the :
Department Authorities?
CST, Delhi Appellant
Vs.
M/s ABN Amro Bank Respondent
Appearance :
Appeared for Appellant : Sh. K.K. Jaiswal,DR, Sh. Sonal Bajaj, DR
Appeared for Respondent : Shri Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
Coram : Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical)
Order Nodated
Per M. Veeraiyan :
Appeal No. 201/2008 is by the department against the order of the Commissioner No. 66/VKG/CST/2007 dated 2.1.2008. Cross-objection No. 244/2088 is connected to this appeal basically supporting the order of the Commissioner.
2. Heard both the sides.
3. The respondent is engaged in the mobilising, selling, recommending mutual fund units of various mutual fund houses and also in selling, mobilising recommending investments in bonds issued by banking and non-banking companies. These activities were clarified to be falling under the category of business auxiliary services by Boards Circular No. 66/15/2003-ST dated 5.11.2003. Relying on the same, Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent proposing demand of Service Tax and proposing imposition of penalties. Commissioner dropped the proceedings relying on the decision of the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Karvy Securities Ltd. Vs. Union of India reported in 2006 (2) STR 481 by which the circular dated 5.11.2003 was set aside.
4. Ld. SDR, drawing our attention in the grounds of appeal submits that the said decision of the Honble High Court stands appealed against before the Honble Supreme Court. Fairly, he concedes that he is not aware that any order has been passed by Honble Supreme Court setting aside the judgement or any stay has been granted.
5. Ld. Advocate submits that though appeal has been admitted no order has been passed by the Honble Supreme Court so far. Ld. Advocate for the respondent also relies on the decision in the case of Commissioner of S.T. Delhi Vs. P.N. Vijay Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2008 (12) STR 628 (Tri.-Del.) holding similar view.
6. We find that the Commissioner has dropped the proceedings on the ground that the Circular dated 5.11.2003 of the Board which was the basis for issue of Show Cause Notice stands set aside by the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The said judgement of the Honble High Court has not been set aside or stayed. Under these circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner.
7. Appeal by the department is, therefore, rejected. Cross-objection is also disposed off.
(Dictated & Pronounced in Court) (ARCHANA WADHWA) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) (M. VEERAIYAN) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) RM