TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Service tax not applicable when entity provides services to itself. Appeal allowed.</h1> <h3>M/s MAYO COLLEGE Versus COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, JAIPUR-II</h3> The Tribunal held that the service tax demand against the appellant for organizing a conference was incorrect. It was determined that no service tax is ... Demand of service tax against holding a convention - Held that: the delegates who had attended the conference were not clients of the appellant. It is the appellant, who out of the money collected from the delegates made arrangement for the mutual benefit of delegates in the conference - Decided in favor of the assessee Issues:Service tax demand confirmation for holding a convention.Analysis:The case involved a service tax demand of Rs.23,65,157/- confirmed against the appellant for providing taxable services related to holding a convention, as per Section 65(105)(zc) read with Section 65(32) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant organized a meeting for educational discussion as an exchange program, where members and participants mutually collected money to organize the conference at a chosen venue. The appellant conducted a conference with 646 delegates from 84 schools of 24 countries, collecting amounts from each delegate for organizing the event.Upon review, it was found that the activity of the appellant was considered a service provided in relation to holding a convention, taxable under the relevant sections of the Finance Act, 1994. However, the Tribunal noted that for a service to be taxable, it must be provided to a client. In this case, the delegates attending the conference were not clients of the appellant; rather, the appellant used the collected money for mutual benefit at the conference. Citing precedents such as Ahmedabad Management Association Vs. Commissioner and Precot Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE, the Tribunal determined that no service tax is chargeable when an entity provides services to itself, as was the case here.Consequently, the Tribunal held that the impugned order confirming the service tax demand was incorrect. Therefore, the order was set aside, and the stay application along with the appeal was allowed.
TaxTMI 
