2017 (5) TMI 960

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rinki Arora, Advocate - for the appellant. Shri Ranjan Khanna, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. ORDER Per. B. Ravichandran :- The appeal is against order dated 04/05/2011 of Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur. The appellants are engaged in providing service as a financial broker by providing arrangement, wherein the lender can loan money to borrower. While providing su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....from the borrower. The confirmation of tax liability against the appellant was not legally sustainable as they have not received any consideration from the money lender and, as such, it cannot be considered that they have promoted their services. 3. The learned AR supported the findings of the lower Authorities and submitted that by acting as a middle man, the appellant did provide facilities t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the client are mentioned as category of activities taxable under BAS. Admittedly, the appellants did provide services, as middle man, which benefited both the lender and the borrower. The arrangement is so, that they did receive commission from the borrower only. It is also a fact that the borrower pays a certain portion of money borrowed, as commission. In such an arrangement, it cannot be di....