2026-VIL-414-CESTAT-CHD-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Business Auxiliary Service, Extended period - The appellant was engaged as a Direct Marketing Associate (DMA) of ICICI Bank and Citi Bank, responsible for developing customers and completing documentation for various loans - Whether the services provided by the appellant fall under the category of Business Auxiliary Service – HELD - Based on the agreements between the parties and the statement of the appellant's proprietor, the appellant was not merely verifying documents but was also actively developing customers for the banks. Therefore, the services provided by the appellant fall under the definition of Business Auxiliary Service and the demand for service tax under this category is upheld - The case laws relied upon by the appellant are not applicable in the facts of the present case because in those cases the assessee was only engaged in verification of the documents whereas, in the present case they are not only working as Direct Marketing Associates for the banks but also developing customers for the bank and therefore, acting as facilitator for the prospective customers - The appellants are liable to pay service tax under BAS - The Commissioner (Appeals) had dropped the demand for the extended period of limitation, finding no fraud, suppression or willful misstatement on the part of the appellant. The revenue did not appeal against this finding. Once the demand for the extended period is set aside, the demand for the normal period would also not survive. Therefore, the demand for the normal period is also set aside - Consequently, on merit, the demand is confirmed, but on limitation, the demand is set aside. The appeal is disposed of accordingly

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page