Business Auxiliary Services do not cover mere table-space rental absent proof of promotion or marketing of financial services.

Providing table space to financial institutions for consideration was held not to amount to Business Auxiliary Services, because the record showed only occupation of space and no evidence of commission for procuring loans, promotion or marketing of financial services, customer inducement, or agency-like activity on behalf of the institutions. In the absence of proof of any business promotion or auxiliary service function, mere leasing of space could not be classified as taxable business auxiliary service. The service tax demand was therefore unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether providing table space to financial institutions and receiving consideration for such space could be treated as promotion of the financial institutions' business so as to fall within Business Auxiliary Services and attract service tax.

Analysis: The only material found was that the appellants had provided space at their premises to financial institutions and had received payment for that space. There was no evidence that the appellants received commission for procuring loans, promoted or marketed the financial institutions' services, induced customers to avail finance from any particular institution, or acted on behalf of the financial institutions in causing sale or purchase of goods or services. On the record, the payment was for occupying table space, which is distinct from a service of business promotion. In the absence of proof of promotion or auxiliary service activity, the mere leasing of space could not be brought within the ambit of Business Auxiliary Services.

Conclusion: The levy of service tax was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed.

---