Supreme Court bench comprising
Chief Justice H.L. Dattu, Justice A.K. Mishra and Justice Amitava Roy has stayed the Bombay High Court’s
order, dated 15.12.2014 in the case of P.C. Joshi Vs. Union of India of
dismissing the petition challenging levy of service tax on lawyers.
The Bombay Bar Association has
challenged aforesaid order as well as the provision of Sub-clause (zzzzm) of
clause (105) to Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994, which was inserted by the
Finance Act, 2011.
Few of the prominent questions of
law, amongst others, as framed before SC are as below:
Whether the relationship between an
advocate and a litigant is that of a provider and a service recipient or whether
the relationship is that of a representative and a litigant?
Whether the impugned judgement is
correct and legal in as much as levy of service tax on the provision of
assistance to the court would hit the provision of justice either by the individual or
a business entity as both are indisputably guaranteed under right to
justice in terms of Article 21 read with Article 39A of the Constitution?
Bombay High Court
It is pertinent to note that Bombay High
Court while dismissing the petition held that
“The taxable service means any service
provided or to be provided to any person, by a business entity, in
relation to advice, consultancy and assistance in any branch of law,
in any manner.”
“Legislature by inserting such
provision has neither interfered with the role and function of an
advocate nor has it made any inroad and interference in the constitutional
guarantee of justice to all. The services provided to an individual
client by an individual advocate continues to be exempted from the purview of
the Finance Act and consequently Service Tax but when an individual advocate
provides service or agrees to provide services to any business entity located
in the taxable territory, then, he is included and liable to pay Service Tax.’ The
judgement also notes, ‘The Advocates and legal practitioners are known to pay professional taxes
and taxes on their
income. They are
also brought within the purview of service
tax because their activities in legal field are expanding in the age of
globalization, liberalization and privatization. They are not only catering to
individuals but business entities.”
No comments:
Post a Comment