Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Citybank N A vs Commissioner Of Gst&Amp;Cce(Chennai ... on 20 November, 2019
1
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
CHENNAI
Appeal No.ST/41230/2018-DB
[Arising out of Order-in-Original No.30/2017 (Commr.) dt.13.12.2017
passed by the Commissioner of Principal Commissioner of CGST &
Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate]
Citibank N.A. Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner CGST & Central Excise,
Chennai North Commissionerate Respondent
Appearance:
Sh.N.Venkataraman, Advocate For the Appellant Ms.K.Komathi, JC (AR) For the Respondent CORAM :
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Hon'ble Shri P.Anjani Kumar, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 20.11.2019 Per : Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) 2 FINAL ORDER No. 41419 / 2019 Brief facts are that the appellant is a scheduled commercial bank and is inter alia engaged in rendering retail banking services including services in relation to issuance of credit cards and settlement of claims. It appeared to the department that the 'Interchange Fees' received by the appellant is a consideration for the services provided by them as issuing bank and is liable to levy of service tax with effect from 1/7/2012. Show cause notices were issued proposing to demand service tax on the interchange fees received by the appellant as issuing bank. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand alongwith interest and imposed penalty. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal.
2. The Ld.Sr.Counsel, Sh.N.Venkataraman appeared for the appellant. He submitted that the very same issue has been decided by the Tribunal in the appellant's own case for the earlier period vide F.O.No.42902/2018 dt.16.11.2018.
3. The Ld.AR, Ms.Komathi appeared for the department.
4. Heard both sides.
5. After hearing the submissions and also perusal of the final order stated above, we find that the issue of levy of service tax on interchange fee collected by the issuing bank has been decided by the Tribunal, wherein it has been categorically held that the same does not 3 attract service tax. Following the said decision, we are of the considered view that the demand cannot sustain and needs to be set aside which we hereby do. The appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs, if any.
(order dictated and pronounced in open court) (Shri P.Anjani Kumar) (Sulekha Beevi C.S) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial) Vsr/Rkp