2013 (4) TMI 18

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant had received commissions from two agencies e.g. M/s. Eastern Finance Ltd. and M/s. SKP Securities Ltd., Kolkata during period 2005-06 and 2006-07. The said amounts were received by the Applicant in rendering the service for mobilization of mutual fund units for the said two financiers who are mutual fund distributors. It is the case of the Department that the said amount is chargeable to Service Tax under the Heading "Business Auxiliary Services" during the relevant period. 3. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the applicant submitted that the Commissioner, Jamshedpur does not have jurisdiction to issue and decide the show cause notice as the service is rendered at Kolkata. Secondly, he has argued that providing of services by the Applican....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sdiction is a mixed question of law and facts and the same is not as clear as observed by the Tribunal in the case of Nylex Traders (supra) nor as it has been clearly found by the adjudicating authority as in Ores India's case (supra). On merit he has contended that the Applicant has received the consideration for marketing the mutual fund on behalf of the Distributing Companies and hence cannot claim the benefit of the principle of Reverse charge mechanism. On the issue of limitation, he has submitted that the facts of rendering the said service against Commission came to the notice of the department on visit to their factory and on scrutiny of their records, besides, it is also a mixed question of facts and law and not a clear case that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the aspect of jurisdiction, we find that in the case of levy of Service Tax it is difficult to ascertain where the services are rendered and where the services are received unless a finding is recorded on these facts. We agree with learned A.R. (Commissioner) that it becomes a mixed question of facts and law and should have been raised before the Commissioner during the course of adjudication. Had such issue raised before the Commissioner then he could have recorded a finding whether the services were rendered/received at Kolkata or under his jurisdiction at Jamshedpur and accordingly the issue of jurisdiction could have been easily decided. We at this stage dispose the application of stay on a prima facie basis. The issue of non payment ....