https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366843 A sub-broker acting as a commission agent for a stock-broker was not providing a branded service merely because it used the main broker's brand name. The service was rendered to the stock-broker, and the trading transaction was between the stock-broker and the ultimate client, so the brand-name objection did not defeat small scale exemption under Notification No. 06/2005-ST. As the aggregate value of taxable service remained within the relevant exemption limit, the exemption was available. en-us Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Sep 2018 09:42:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366843 A sub-broker acting as a commission agent for a stock-broker was not providing a branded service merely because it used the main broker's brand name. The service was rendered to the stock-broker, and the trading transaction was between the stock-broker and the ultimate client, so the brand-name objection did not defeat small scale exemption under Notification No. 06/2005-ST. As the aggregate value of taxable service remained within the relevant exemption limit, the exemption was available. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366843