2018 (5) TMI 722

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt arranges the borrowers, who need money and introduces them with the money lenders, who provide money on loan basis. For undertaking such activity, the appellant collects its commission/brokerage from the borrower. Such activities performed by the appellant were interpreted by the department that the same should fall under the taxable category of business auxiliary service. Accordingly, after initiation of show cause proceedings, the department has confirmed adjudged demand against the appellant. 3. The learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the appellant did not provide any service to the client on behalf of some other person. Thus, the services provided by him cannot be categorized as a taxable service, under the head of bus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ein the Tribunal held as below :- 8. It is seen from the description of the activity that the appellant does not enter into any contract, written or implied, with either the financier or the borrower; nor is there any responsibility cast upon the appellant in the event of default on the part of financier or the borrower. Accordingly, the appellant fails the test of description as agency or agent for classification as commission agent under Section 65(19) of Finance Act, 1994. There is no force in the argument that rendering any activity that fall in Section 65(19)(vii) would classify the appellant as 'commission agency' when Section 65(19)(vii) can be invoked only in relation to the preceding subcategories. 9. The case law....