https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447999 The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand against the appellant who provided share trading tips/information to clients. The tribunal held that merely providing tips/information about shares traded on NSE and BSE does not constitute "Banking and Other Financial Services" under service tax law, as the appellant did not provide advisory services, investment advice, or portfolio management. The appellant only shared research-based information without guiding clients on buying/selling decisions or quantities. Additionally, the demand was time-barred under Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994, as transactions were recorded in books without suppression. The adjudicating authority also erred in not applying cum-tax value methodology for demand calculation. en-us Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447999 The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand against the appellant who provided share trading tips/information to clients. The tribunal held that merely providing tips/information about shares traded on NSE and BSE does not constitute "Banking and Other Financial Services" under service tax law, as the appellant did not provide advisory services, investment advice, or portfolio management. The appellant only shared research-based information without guiding clients on buying/selling decisions or quantities. Additionally, the demand was time-barred under Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994, as transactions were recorded in books without suppression. The adjudicating authority also erred in not applying cum-tax value methodology for demand calculation. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447999