Madhavaraja Club vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ...

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 451/2014 dated 20/06/2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Cochin]

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 34 & 35/2012 dated 23/01/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Cochin]

For approval and signature:

HON'BLE Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Mr. B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER

1 Whether Press Reporters 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 the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 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

Madhavaraja Club English Church Road Palakkad  678 007 Kerala Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Cochin C.R Building, I.S Press Road, Ernakulam, Cochin  682 018 Kerala Respondent(s)

Appearance:

Mr. Sivadas Chettoor, CA Door No. 15/513 (46), Shalom Fort Plus Building, Stadium Bye-pass Road, Near Trinity Eye Care Centre, Palakkad  678 013 For the Appellant

Mr. A.K. Nigam, AR For the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 30/03/2015 Date of Decision: 30/03/2015 CORAM:

HON'BLE Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Mr. B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER

Final Order No. 20924, 20926-20927 / 2015

Per : B.S.V. MURTHY

The appellant is a club meant to provide services only to the members. A service tax demand has been confirmed on the ground that appellant is liable to pay service tax for provision of service to guests of a member and amount paid for get-together and function charges over and above the subscription amount. In the case of Sports Club of Gujarat Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2013 (31) S.T.R. 645 (Guj.)], Honble High Court considered the issue and taking decision in the case of Ranchi Club Ltd. Vs. CCE [2012 (26) S.T.R. 401 (Jhar.)] note of, held that the services rendered by the club to the members cannot be held liable to service tax. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decisions discussed above and no longer res integra. Accordingly all the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants. (Order pronounced in open court)

(B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER (ARCHANA WADHWA) JUDICIAL MEMBER

iss