Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2015-16/2751

Whether Verification of information furnished by loan seekers on behalf of customer is taxable or not?

Case:-CREDENTIALS Versus  COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-III
 
Citation:-2015 (37) S.T.R. 235 (Tri. - Mumbai)
 
Brief facts:-The appellants are in appeals against the impugned orders wherein Service Tax liability has been confirmed against the appellants under the category of Business Auxiliary Service for the period July, 2002 to March, 2006.
As the issue involved in all the appeals are common therefore, all the appeals are disposed of by a common order.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are providing service namely verification of information given by the customers applying for the Credit Cards, Home Loans or Auto Loans etc. The said activities have been outsourced to them by various banks. The appellants are registered under the category of Business Auxiliary Services and paying Service Tax on the said activities except for the services provided to ICICI Bank and IDBI Bank. Revenue was of the view that as the appellants are not paying Service Tax on the services mentioned here-in-above provided to ICICI Bank and IDBI Bank therefore, they are required to pay Service Tax during the impugned period for the services provided to ICICI Bank and IDBI Bank. Show cause notices were issued to the appellants. Demands were adjudicated and confirmed along with interest and penalties. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before tribunal.
 
Appellant’s contention:-The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the activity undertaken by the appellants falls under the category of “Business Support Service” which came into effect on 1-5-2006. Therefore, the appellants are not required to pay Service Tax under the category of “Business Auxiliary Service” prior to May, 2006. In the circumstance, he prays that the impugned order be set aside.
 
Respondent’s contention:- On the other hand, the learned AR submits that from 1-7-2003 the activity of “Business Auxiliary Service” came into Service Tax net and as per Clause (iv) of Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994, the activities and services of the appellants coming within the ambit of the Service Tax category of “Business Auxiliary Service”. Therefore, the appellants are required to pay Service Tax during the impugned period. It is further submitted that intention to evade payment is very much clear from the dealing of the appellants as they are paying Service Tax on the same services provided to other Banks except ICICI and IDBI. Therefore, extended period of limitation is also invocable in the facts of this case.
 
Reasoning of judgment:-They have gone through the Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994 which defines the term “Business Auxiliary Service” during the relevant period which is reproduced hereinunder :-
“Business Auxiliary Service”
(i)         promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to the client; or
(ii)        promotion or marketing of service provided by the client; or
(iii)       any customer care service provided on behalf of the client; or
(iv)       any incidental or auxiliary support service such as billing, collection or recovery of cheques, account and remittance, evaluation of prospective customer and public relation services,
and includes services as a commission agent, but does not include any information technology service.
Prior to 10-9-2004, the activity undertaken by the appellant clearly falls under Clause (iv) of Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, prior to 10-9-2004, they hold that the appellant is required to pay Service Tax and the demand for Service Tax for that period is confirmed.
They also observe that with effect from 10-9-2004 the definition of “Business Auxiliary Service” was amended and as per the said definition the “Business Auxiliary Service” is exhausted and the activities undertaken by the appellants were not covered by the said definition. They have gone through the said definition also which is reproduced hereinunder :-
“business auxiliary service” means any service in relation to -
(i)         promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or provided by or belonging to the client; or
(ii)        promotion or marketing of service provided by the client; or
(iii)       any customer care service provided on behalf of the client; or
(iv)       procurement of goods or services, which are inputs for the client; or
(v)        production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of the client; or
(vi)       provision of service on behalf of the client; or
(vii)      a service incidental or auxiliary to any activity specified in sub-clauses (i) to (vi), such as billing, issue or collection or recovery of cheques, payments, maintenance of accounts and remittance, inventory management, evaluation or development of prospective customer or vendor, public relation services, management or supervision and includes services as a commission agent (but does not include any activity that amounts to “manufacture” of excisable goods.)
As per the said definition, the activity undertaken by the appellant is not covered under clauses (i) to (vi) of Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994, then they are not required to pay Service Tax on their activity. As in this case, the appellants activities does not get covered under clauses (i) to (vi) of Section 65(19). Therefore, they hold that with effect from 10-9-2004 onwards the appellants are not required to pay Service Tax. They find support to the case from the decision of this Tribunal in the case of S.R. Kalyanakrishnanv. CCE - 2008 (9)S.T.R.255 (Tri.-Bang.) wherein this Tribunal has observed that verification of information furnished by loan seekers cannot be treated as promoting their business. Therefore, such activity does not fall under “Business Auxiliary Service” but with effect from 1-5-2006, it falls under the category of “Business Support Service”. Following the precedent decision in the case of S.R. Kalyanakrishnan (supra), they hold that for the period 10-9-2004 onwards the appellants are not liable for Service Tax under the category of “Business Auxiliary Service” on their activities.
Therefore, it is concluded that the appellants are liable to pay Service Tax for the period 1-7-2003 to 9-9-2004 on the services provided to ICICI and IDBI Banks under the category of “BAS”. With these terms the appellants are directed to pay Service Tax for the said period along with interest.
They further find that as the appellants are paying Service Tax on the same activities provided to other banks therefore, they impose penalties equivalent to their Service Tax liabilities on the appellants under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. They further find that as the appellants have not charged Service Tax separately from ICICI and IDBI Banks therefore, the remuneration received towards providing Service Tax shall be treated as cum-service charges.
Appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
 
Decision:-Appeals disposed off.
 
Comment:-The crux of the case is that the activity of verification of information furnished by loan seekers on behalf of ICICI and IDBI Bank, clearly falls under the definition of Business Auxiliary Service. w.e.f. 10.9.2014 this activity is not considered as Business auxiliary service.  Appellants are liable to pay Service Tax for the period 1-7-2003 to 9-9-2004 on the services provided to ICICI and IDBI Banks under the category of BAS. Appellants have not charged Service Tax separately from ICICI and IDBI Banks therefore, the remuneration received towards providing Service Tax shall be treated as cum-service tax.

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