75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

January 2012

(2011) 24 STR 410 (Tri.-Delhi) — Punjab Venture Capital Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh.

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri
Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Consultancy of fund management including the identification of the projects not covered in Management Consultancy service — Primary objects were to find investment proposal and fund allocation — Confusion between Banking and Financial Services and Management Consultants — Sections 65(12) and 65(65) of Finance Act, 1994.

Facts
The issue arose as regards the interpretation of the term ‘Management Consultant’ with the term ‘Banking & Financial services’.

Held
The Tribunal observed that the excerpts of Fund Management agreement clearly show that the activity was to explore possibility of investment by various modalities. Also, it is clear that the appellants carried out the activity of providing service of consultancy of Fund Management including the identification of the projects. Allowing the appeal, the Tribunal held that the Department’s case was not coming out clearly as regards nature of services provided by the appellants. The Tribunal held that the appellants were providing the service of banking and financial services as their primary objective was to find investment proposal which involved fund allocation.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

(2011) 24 STR 408 (Tri.-Delhi) — Rakesh Porwal & Associates v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II.

2013-TIOL-834-CESTAT-DEL M/s. Cerebral Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore.