2017 (12) TMI 837

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ky Arora, Advocate for the respondent ORDER Per B. Ravichandran The Revenue is aggrieved by the order dated 29.06.2012 of Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent is engaged in providing catering service. They have entered into an agreement with M/s.Anand Niketan Club. The agreement dated 24.08.2009 stipulates various conditions for the res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ny finding regarding imposition of penalty. Revenue prayed for imposition of penalties on the respondent. 3. Ld. AR elaborating the grounds of appeal submitted that there is no joint venture in the arrangement. The respondent was appointed as a caterer in the premises of Anand Niketan Club and it is classified as taxable service under "ourdoor catering service". The consideration for the facility....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6. On the first issue, we have perused the terms of the agreement. The respondent has been appointed as a caterer to render and provide catering services to the members of the client's club. Various clauses of the agreement make it clear that it is a service agreement for a consideration entered into between the two parties. The only premise on which the impugned order came to a conclusion regar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ility or obligation, legally enforceable against the Anand Niketan Club except the provisions of terms and conditions inbuilt in the contract. We find no scope for interpreting the agreement as Joint Venture Agreement for a catering service. The respondent is appointed as a caterer and are paying considerations for the premises allotted to them. A reference as made by the Original Authority on a B....