Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2015-16/2706

Whether assistance for selection of granite blocks and execution of export order is taxable as Management Consultancy Services?

Case :-PUSHKAR STEELS PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT-I
 
Citation:-2015 (38) S.T.R. 173 (Tri. - Del.)
 
Brief facts :-The appellants are manufacturers of M.S. Ingots. During scrutiny of their balance sheet in the financial year 1999-2000, it was noticed that they had shown income of Rs. 34,92,277/- as commission. On query with the appellant about the details of this commission, they explained that out of the said amount, an amount of Rs. 21,29,250/- was received from their customers for “marking selection of granite blocks” and the remaining amount of Rs. 13,19,977/- was received by them from their customers for “services rendered in executing export orders”. According to the department, both these activities of the appellants are Management Consultancy Services taxable under Section 65(105)(r) read with Section 65(65) of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant for demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 1,72,162/- along with interest and also for imposition of penalty on them under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The above show cause notice was adjudicated by the Asstt. Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 1-1-2007 by which the above mentioned Service Tax demand was confirmed along with interest and besides this, penalties were imposed on the appellant under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. On appeal being filed to the Commissioner (Appeals) against this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 31-10-2008 upheld the Asstt. Commissioner’s order. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed.
 
Appellant’s contention :-Shri Alok Arora, Advocate, ld. Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that in terms of Section 65(105)(r), service provided to a client by a Management Consultant in connection with the management of any organization in any manner is taxable, that the term “Management Consultant” is defined under Section 65(65) as, “any person who is engaged in providing any service either directly or indirectly in connection with the management of any organization in any manner and includes any person who renders any advice, consultancy or technical assistance, relating to conceptualizing, devising, development, modification, rectification or upgradation of any working system of any organization” that in the present case, the department has not specified as to which organisation is the recipient of the alleged Management Consultancy/Advice provided by the appellant, that mere assisting individual clients for selecting the granite blocks, or helping them in executing the export orders does not constitute “Management Consultancy Service”, and that in view of the above, the impugned order is not sustainable.
 
Respondent’s contention :-Shri Pramod Kumar, ld. Joint CDR defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals).

Reasoning of judgement :-The appellant are a manufacturer of M.S. Ingots and besides this, they have some other non-manufacturing activities which are helping in marking of granite blocks and rendering assistance in execution of the export orders and from these services, they earned income of Rs. 34,49,277/- during 1999-2000. According to the department, this activity of the appellant is “Management Consultant Service” as defined under Section 65(105)(r) read with Section 65(65) of the Finance Act, 1994.
Under Section 65(105)(r), service provided to a client by a management consultant in connection with the management of any organization, in any manner is taxable. The term “Management Consultant” is defined in Section 65(65) which is reproduced as under :-
“Management Consultant means any person who is engaged in providing any service, either directly or indirectly,in connection with the management of any organization in any manner and includes any person who renders any advice, consultancy or technical assistance, relating to conceptualizing, devising, development, modification, rectification or upgradation of any working system of any organization”.
In this case, the organization to whom Management Consultancy service is alleged to have been provided is not specified. Moreover, the service provided has to be in relation to the Management of an organization including advice, Consultancy or technical assistance for rectification or improvement of system of the organization. Mere helping a client in executing the export orders or in selecting granite blocks is not at all covered by the Management Consultancy Service, as there is no element of any consultancy with objective of management, rectification or improvement of the working system of an organization. The activity of the appellant therefore does not fall under Section 65(105)(r) read with Section 65(65). As such, the impugned order is not sustainable. The same is set aside. The appeal is allowed.
 
Decision :-Appeal allowed
 
Comment :- The gist of the case is that Management Consultant means any person who is engaged in providing any service, either directly or indirectly, in connection with the management of any organization in any manner and includes any person who renders any advice, consultancy or technical assistance, relating to conceptualizing, devising, development, modification, rectification or upgradation of any working system of any organization. There isno element of any consultancy with objective of management in the present case and further, the organization to whom Management Consultancy service is alleged to have been provided is also not specified. Therefore, it was concluded that mere marking of granite blocks and assistance in execution order is not taxable as Management Consultancy Services.

Prepared by :- Monika Tak
 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com