Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2020 (10) TMI 476

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....'gross amount' computed for tax liability on service rendered between April 2008 and March 2011. According to the tax authorities, the entire amount totaling Rs.2,36,49,608, having been billed, should have been taxed. The original authority confirmed demand of Rs.24,72,155 under section 73 of Finance Act, 1994, along with applicable interest under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994, besides imposing penalty of like amount under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 as well as Rs.10,000 under section 77 of Finance Act, 1994. 2. Aggrieved by this order, the assessee carried the dispute in appeal and the rejection thereof, in order-in-appeal no. GOA-EXCUS-000-APP-157-2016-17 dated 29th September 2016 of Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as consideration for the service contracted by their clients. He placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in Impact Communications v. Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi [2018 (8) GSTL 396 (Tri-Del)] and in Sercon India Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi [2018 (14) GSTL 375 (Tri-Del)]. 5. It has been pointed out by Learned Counsel that the said decision in re Sercon India Pvt Ltd has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Notwithstanding the current status of that decision of the Tribunal and the other decision cited by Learned Authorized Representative, we take note that both, observing that the facts therein are distinguishable from those in the dispute before Hon'ble High Court, did not have the benefit of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ity. 7. The service offered by the appellant, and taxable within the framework of section 65(105)(zu) of Finance Act, 1994, is, unlike other taxable services that are 'provided to any person' 'by any other person', rendered '(zu) to any person, by an event manager in relation to event management' with the relevant expressions, '(40) "Event Management" means any service provided in relation to planning, promotion, organising or presentation of any arts, entertainment, business, sports, marriage or any other event and includes any consultation provided in this regard' and '(41) "Event Manager" means any person who is engaged in providing any service in relation to event management in any manner' defined ....