KRISHAN MURARI GUPTA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed against the order 27-9-2012 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT for short), by which the appeal of the assessee-appellant was not admitted and was rejected on the premise that the same was delayed by 146 days.

(2.) The brief facts noticed are that the assesse-appellant is said to be commission agent and is providing services on account of investment of funds. It was the claim of the Revenue that the appellant being the service provider, providing services for investment of money and getting commission on the investment amount which falls under the category of business auxiliary services and the appellant was required to pay Service Tax in respect of the commission income earned by way of distribution and marketing units of mutual funds and liable under Section 65(19) of the Rajasthan Finance Act, 1994 and accordingly directed to levy service tax as aforesaid.

(3.) The matter was carried in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who however upheld the findings of the Assessing Officer, however in the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) on finding of fact it was noticed that the revenue was justified to levy tax of Rs. 36,935/- only as against Rs. 70,300/- assessed by the Assessing Officer.