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>Appellant's Bill Discounting Deemed Banking Service, Appeal Dismissed</h1> <h3>M/s. Surin Automotive Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Chennai</h3> M/s. Surin Automotive Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Chennai - TMI Issues involved:The issues involved in the judgment are whether the appellant's activity of bill discounting falls under the category of 'banking and other financial services' for the purpose of Service Tax liability.Comprehensive details:The appellant, a registered service provider for Goods Transport Operator Service, received amounts for the periods 2007-08 and 2008-09. The Department raised a doubt regarding the nature of the appellant's activity, leading to a Show Cause Notice proposing Service Tax under 'banking and other financial services'.In response, the appellant denied rendering any service under 'banking and other financial services'. However, the Deputy Commissioner confirmed the demand, leading to the appellant filing an appeal which was dismissed by the first appellate authority.The appellant's advocate argued that the bill discounting was a trade-related activity, not a service, as it was part of a commercial transaction between the seller and the buyer. The appellant did not receive consideration for initiating the bill discounting scheme.On the other hand, the Revenue supported the lower authorities' findings, citing the definition of 'banking and other financial services' to include bill discounting. They also relied on a previous CESTAT order.The Tribunal considered whether the appellant's activity fell under the definition of 'banking and other financial services'. The appellant contended that they were not a banking company or financial institution, hence not liable for Service Tax. However, the Tribunal found that the appellant, being a body corporate, was covered under the definition of 'banking and other financial services'.The Tribunal's decision was supported by a previous case, and as the appellant did not deny providing bill discounting facility, the appeal was dismissed.The judgment was pronounced on 04.08.2023.
TaxTMI 