2016 (12) TMI 398

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....esent appeal. 2. As per the facts on record, proceedings were initiated against the respondent by issuing a show cause notice dated 01.01.2008 alleging that during the period from 2003-04 to 2006-07, by selling the goods of M/s. Amar Products on commission basis, they have provided business auxiliary services, which were liable to service tax, raised the demand of service tax against the appellant. During adjudication the original adjudicating authority took a view that as the appellant was providing such services to M/s. Amar Products as an individual and not under the name of any commercial concern he would not be covered by the definition of Business Auxiliary Services as appearing in section 55 (105)(zzb) of the Finance Act 1994. The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itation. While dealing with the merits of the case, commissioner (A) observed as under: "From the clarifications issued by the CBEC in the above mentioned Circulars, it is amply clear that services performed by individuals in their individual capacity without having proper commercial establishment would not be chargeable to Service Tax. In other words, individuals undertaking services cannot be subjected to Service Tax where scope to levy service tax has been limited to a commercial concern only by virtue of definition in the relevant section. Therefore, applying the same analogy, in the instant case also, individuals undertaking services in their individual capacity cannot be regarded as commercial concern as per the definition in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ents of the Hon ble Tribunal in this regard. I find that it is settled principle of law that extended period is not invokable where the issue involves interpretation of various provisions of law and information is already disclosed in statutory documents such as Balance Sheet or Income Tax Returns. Accordingly, the submission of the appellant in this regard does not hold ground. Keeping in view, the aforesaid CBEC circulars, judgments relied upon by the adjudicating authority and facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that there is no substance and force in the appeal filed by the Revenue and uphold the findings of the adjudicating authority that respondent had undertaken the said services as an individual and cannot be regarded as com....