M/S Sanjayraj Hotels & Resorts vs Commissioners Of Central Excise

[ Arising out of OIA-RJT-EXCUS-000-APP-330-13-14 dtd 30.7.2013 Passed by Commissioners of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-RAJKOT ]

M/s Sanjayraj Hotels & Resorts Pvt Ltd - Appellant (s) Vs.

Commissioners of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-RAJKOT - Respondent (s)

Represented by:

Appellant (s) : Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate Respondent (s) : Shri Alok Srivastava, Authorised Representative

For approval and signature :

Mr. P.K. Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. H.K. Thakur, Honble Member (Technical)

1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

Yes

CORAM :

Mr. P.K.Das, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. H.K. Thakur, Honble Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing / Decision : 20/4/2015

ORDER No. A/10662 / 2015 dated 20.04.2015

Per : Mr. P.K.Das;

The appellant filed this application for early hearing of the appeal. After hearing both the sides, we find that the appeal may be decided at this stage.

2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of records, we find that the demand of service tax was raised on the Advance Receipts from the club members to provide club services to their club members for specific period. It is not seen from the show cause notice that the amount collected by the appellant from their members for rendering services. Learned Advocate submits that the Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sports Club of Gujarat Ltd vs UOI  2013.31.STR.645 (Guj.) held that the various service tax in respect of service promotion provided by the petitioners to its members to be ultra vires.

3. The Leaned Authorised Representative submits that the decision of Honble Gujarat High Court is applicable to the extent of service rendered to its members. But the present case relates to subscription fee. We are unable to accept the submissions of the Learned Authorised Representative for Revenue.

4. The appellant collected the membership fees from the member to promote club service which would clearly cover by the decision of Honble Gujarat High Court. In view of that, the impugned order cannot be sustained and accordingly, it is set aside. The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. The Early Hearing application is disposed of.

(Dictated and pronounced in the Court)

(H.K. Thakur) (P.K. Das) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

swami

2