Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.23 seconds)Section 65 in The Finance Act, 2018 [Entire Act]
Sukhmani Society For Citizen Services vs C.C.E. & S.T., Chandigarh on 19 July, 2016
clause (i) (vi), such as billing, issue or collection or recovery of
cheques, payments, maintenance of accounts and remittance,
inventory management, evaluation or development of
prospective customer or vendor, public relation services,
management of supervision,
20 ST/881/2008 & ST/1915/2010
And includes services as a commission agent, but does not include any
activity that amounts to "manufacture" within the meaning of clause (f)
of section 2 of the central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944).
After considering the definition of BAS we are of the considered view
that for a transaction to be covered under the taxable category of
BAS, the service rendered must be auxiliary to some business
activity of the service recipient has held by this Tribunal in the case of
Sukhmani Society for Citizen Services Vs. CCE & ST,
Chandigarh (Supra) wherein it has been held that business
auxiliary services would become chargeable to service tax only if the
service is rendered in relation to business of recipient. Further, we
find that in the present case the borrowers are individuals who are
availing personal loans and these loans have not been availed for any
business or commercial purpose and hence the service provided by
the appellant is not classifiable under business auxiliary service. This
issue is also decided against the Revenue and in favour of the
appellant.
M/S Bharti Airtel Limited vs Cce, Indore on 28 July, 2016
20. Now, coming to the invocation of extended period of limitation
we are of the view that since there were divergent views of the
Tribunal and the issue was referred to the larger bench for final
disposal clearly shows that the issue involves interpretation of law
and hence extended period cannot be invoked for this, we rely upon
the decision in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. CCE 2021 (4) TMI
306-(Tri.-Bang.) (Supra).