2007 (2) TMI 106 - AT - Service Tax

CESTAT Bangalore Upholds Commissioner's Decision on Business Auxiliary Services for Stock Broker

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order setting aside demands made in OIO No. 3/06. The assessee, providing ... Business Auxiliary Services - Stock Broker services - service tax liability - promotion of sales or marketing of goods - classification of services - stay of operationBusiness Auxiliary Services - Stock Broker services - promotion of sales or marketing of goods - service tax liability - Whether the assessee's services (stock broker and registrar/share transfer agent) could be classified as Business Auxiliary Services and subjected to a fresh demand when the assessee was already paying service tax as a stock broker. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal recorded that the assessee rendered Stock Broker services and also acted as Registrar and Share Transfer Agent during the stated period. Revenue sought to cover those services under Business Auxiliary Services. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand after finding that the definition of Business Auxiliary Services requires promotion of marketing or sale of goods, which was absent; the assessee was carrying on stock broking activity and was already paying service tax under Stock Broker services. The Tribunal, on prima facie consideration, agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) that there was no material to show promotion of sale or marketing of goods by the assessee and that classification as Business Auxiliary Services therefore did not arise. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's contention and refused interim relief. [Paras 3]The demand reclassifying the services as Business Auxiliary Services was prima facie incorrect; the assessee falls within Stock Broker services and the stay application was rejected.Final Conclusion: The Appellate Tribunal, on prima facie consideration, upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s view that the assessee's activities did not amount to Business Auxiliary Services because there was no promotion of sale or marketing of goods, observed that the assessee was already taxable as a stock broker, and dismissed the Revenue's application for stay. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order setting aside demands made in OIO No. 3/06. The assessee, providing Stock Broker services, was not liable for Business Auxiliary Services as there was no promotion of sales or marketing of goods. The Revenue's challenge was rejected, and the stay application was denied.