TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (8) TMI 71
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e AMC charges are received in advance and service tax is paid by them at the rate prevalent at the time of entering the contracts. In the show cause notice, it was alleged that although the contacts of annual maintenance charges were entered before 10.9.2004, but in terms of Notification No.05/2004-ST dt.9.7.2004, the appellants are required to pay service tax on higher rate as the rate of service tax was 8% prior to 10.09.2004 which increased to 10% plus 2% education cess on 10.09.2004. Therefore, the appellant is required to pay differential amount of service tax. The matter was adjudicated, the demand of service tax was confirmed along with interest and penalty was also imposed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before us. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al amount of service tax for remaining part of annual maintenance contract or not. Ld.AR has heavily relied on the Notification No.5/2004-ST dated 9.7.2004 which reads as under: "Explanation- For the removal of doubt it is hereby clarified that in case the value of taxable service is received before providing the said service tax shall be paid on the value of service attributable to the relevant month, or quarter, as the case may be". 7. We have gone through the explanation of the notification and the circular clarifying that in case the value for the taxable services received before providing services, in that case, the services tax shall be paid on the value attributable to the relevant period. It is not in the case in hand. The case in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....surer is expected to render the services on the day when the premium is received by him. It is also to be noted that the insurance business is covered by the provisions of Insurance Act and, hence, the appellants herein has to issue policy in consonance with the provisions of Insurance Act. Appellant cannot assure the coverage of risk of an insurer, unless the premium payment is received in advance. In other words, the services rendered by the appellants as a general insurance company will take place on the date when appellant receives the insurance premium on the policy. We find that the dispute in this case is regarding the discharge of differential service tax liability from 10-9-2004 and subsequently, when the rates of service tax are i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice tax net w.e.f. 16-7-2001. At that time, CBEC issued clarification to the effect that in respect of Hire Purchase Contracts entered prior to 16-7-2001 and instalments of which were received after 16-7-2001, there is no Service tax liability. In our view, the same logic is applicable to the present case also. When the Hire Purchase contract is entered, the taxable event occurs. We agree with the appellants that the instalment payments are only obligations of the hirer. The finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellant continues to provide service during the payment of instalments is not correct. Therefore, the rate of Service tax will be the rate prevailing on the date on which the contract is entered into. Consequently, the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... l/94-Service Tax dated 28-6-94. Thus taxable service provided on or after 1-7-1994, alone will attract service tax. Thus, the policies covering the risk from 1-7-94 and delayed payment after 1-7-1994 for earlier period would not attract service tax." 18. It can be noticed that the above clarification was given by the Board as early as in the year 1995 and that also in respect of the insurance service. Since an identically worded circular in respect of banking and other financial services is interpreted by the Tribunal in the case of Art Leasing Ltd. (supra), the same reasoning will also apply in this case. Hence, to our mind the enhanced rate of Service Fax is not applicable to the policies, which were issued prior to the enhancement of ....