Mandap keeper service requires temporary occupation of a mandap for a function; temple stall rentals did not qualify.

Mere allotment of stalls in an open area adjoining a temple for sale of goods during Navratri did not amount to mandap keeper service because the statutory requirement is temporary occupation of a mandap for an official, social or business function for consideration. The activity was confined to permitting stall occupation by persons selling items such as toys, garlands, flowers and food, which did not satisfy the defined service. On that basis, the service tax demand was unsustainable, the confirmations were set aside, and the appeals succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether letting out stalls in the open area adjoining a temple during Navratri for sale of goods amounted to mandap keeper service and attracted service tax.

Analysis: Liability under mandap keeper service arises only where a person allows temporary occupation of a mandap for a consideration for organizing an official, social or business function. The activity in question consisted of allotting stalls to different persons for selling items such as toys, garlands, flowers and food. The material on record showed that the appellants were managing temple affairs and had merely permitted stall occupation, which did not answer the statutory description of mandap keeper service.

Conclusion: The activity did not fall within the scope of mandap keeper service and the service tax demand was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The service tax confirmations were set aside and the appeals succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere letting out of stalls in an open area for commercial sale, without allowing temporary occupation of a mandap for an official, social or business function, does not constitute mandap keeper service.

---