2023 (3) TMI 1460

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has confirmed service tax demand of Rs. 231.42 Crores in respect of the impugned service provided by the appellants during the period 16.05.2008 to 31.03.2011. Besides, impugned order has also confirmed the interest demands and imposed equal amount of penalty on the appellants under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rs. 5000/- under Section 77 ibid. The adjudged demands were confirmed on the ground that the margin money/profit/Spread earned out of Foreign Currency (FC) transactions is to be treated as consideration for provision of the taxable service by the appellants and such amount should be chargeable to payment of service tax. 2. Briefly stated, the fact of the case are that the appellants herein are engaged in providing vario....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Excise, Jaipur - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 307 (Tri. - Del.). He further submitted that in an identical case, pertaining to Andhra Bank, the Principal Commissioner of Service Tax, Hyderabad has dropped the proposals made in show cause notice, seeking confirmation of the adjudged demands in respect of the profit earned on the transaction of foreign exchange. He also submitted that said order dated 23.02.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Hyderabad was accepted by the Committee of Chief Commissioners and no appeal was filed before the appellate forum. Thus, he pleaded for setting aside the impugned order on the ground that the issue is no more open for any debate. 4. On the other hand, learned Authorized Representative appearing for th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... any provision of service, by which the disputed profit margin, was generated, the said element of profit shall not be considered as a 'taxable value' for the purpose of levy of service tax. 7. We find that this Tribunal in the case of State Bank of India (supra) and State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (supra) has held that margin of profit is not taxable under the Finance Act, 1994 and it is only the gross value, which is recognised under the statute for sufferance of the tax element on the value of the services rendered, which admittedly, the appellants in this case, has duly complied with. Further, we also find that the adjudication Order dated 23.02.2017 (supra) passed by the Hyderabad Commissionerate in the case of Andhra Bank, in drop....