TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1473
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to service tax in the hands of the appellant being a stock broker. 2. Shri Aditya Tripathi, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the outset submits that this issue has been settled in various judgments. He relied on the judgment of this Tribunal passed vide Order No. A/12761-12788/2017 dated 29.09.2017 in the case of Span Caplease Pvt. Limited and others vs. CST, Ahmedabad. In this order, almost 28 appeals of the identically placed stock brokers were decided in favour of the assessees. He also placed reliance on the judgments in the case of Anagram Capital Limited vs. CST, Ahmedabad vide Order No. A/10838/2018 dated 06.04.2018 and in the case of Mohak Commodities Pvt. Limited vs. CCE, Jaipur - 2018 (10) GSTL 316 (Tri. Del.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....termination of the aforesaid question should not the same has been considered by way of judgments Including M/S LSE Securities Ltd (supra) "12.1 Matters before us fall within the periods before 2001 and after 2001 but before 2004. When service tax was introduced in the year 1994 to tax the service provided to investors by stock brokers in connection with sale or purchase of securities listed on a recognized stock exchange, Legislature, up to the year 2001 intended that aggregate of the commission or brokerage charged to the investors by stock broker for sale or purchase of securities shall be taxed under the charging provision of the Act. So also the commission or the brokerage paid by srock bréker to any sub-broker was made liable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tself clearly. It is well settled that power to tax cannot be inferred by implication; there must be a charging section specifically empowering the State to levy tax. When these are the principles laid down by Apex Court in the case of Slate of West Bengal v. Kesoram Industries Ltd. - (2004) 10 SCC 201, bringing a strange element to the ambit of tax shall be without authority of law. There was no scope provided by Section 67 of the Act to expend its width to have artificial measure of levy bringing a receipt by implication or inference running counter to the charging provision. 12.4 The scheme of valuation of aforesaid service which was in force till 15-7-2001 underwent amendment by Finance Act, 2001. The amending Act replaced Section 67 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SC 1640]. 13. Learned Counsels arguing the matter are correct to say that budget speech of the Hon'ble Finance Minister made clear what was intended to be taxed in respect of service provided by stock broker. It was submission of the Learned Counsel Shri Mittal that insofar as stock brokers are concerned, brokerage or commission charged by them only from value of taxable service and that was intended to be taxed by the budget of 1994-95. This was the proposal in Part 'B' of the Budget presented to the Parliament on 28th February, 1994. Reading of the legislative intent from the budget speech and the express Legislation in Section 67 of the Act does not Leave any room for implication of ambiguity. Therefore, express grant of the statute n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e only and that should only be taxed without any hypothetical rule of computation of value of taxable service under Section 67 of the Act. The other receipts a stock broker makes are irrelevant for determination of the assessable value of taxable service provided by him. Thus the test is whether a receipt of stock broker is in the nature of commission or brokerage to levy service tax. Burden of proof failed to be discharged by Revenue to bring the receipts to charge 16. The appellants in these appeals received "turnover charges", stamp duty, BSE charges, SEBI fees and DEMAT charges contending that the same was payable to different authorities and claimed that the same is not taxable. But Revenue taxed the same on the ground that such re....