##PAGE1##

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

CHANDIGARH

REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I

Service Tax Appeal No. 60261 of 2016

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 53/ST/DLH/2016 dated 17.03.2016 passed by

the Commissioner (Appeals-I), Central Excise Commissionerate, Delhi]

Panchkula Golf Club ……Appellant

Sector 3, Panchkula,

Haryana 134112

VERSUS

Commissioner of Central Excise and ……Respondent

Service Tax, Panchkula

SCO 407-408, Sector 8,

Panchkula, Haryana 134119

APPEARANCE:

Mr. Pawan K. Pahwa, Advocate with Mr. R.R. Yadav, Consultant for the

Appellant

Mr. Yashpal Singh with Mr. Varun Sharma, Authorized Representatives for

the Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. S. S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. 60213/2026

DATE OF HEARING: 07.11.2025

DATE OF DECISION: 27.02.2026

S. S. GARG :

The present appeal is directed against impugned Order-in-

Appeal (‘OIA’) No. 53/ST/DLH/2016 dated 17.03.2016 passed by the

Commissioner (Appeals-I), Central Excise Commissionerate, Delhi,

2 ST/60261/2016

whereby the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the

appeal of the Appellant by upholding the Order-in-Original (‘OIO’).

2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the Appellant,

M/s Panchkula Golf Club, is registered with the Service Tax

department for providing taxable services under the category of

‘Club or Association Membership Services’. An audit of the

Appellant’s record was conducted by the department and it was

found that the Appellant had not discharged the appropriate service

tax liability on the correct taxable value as reflected in the balance-

sheet vis-à-vis the value declared in the ST-3 returns for the period

2008-09 to 2011-12. On this allegation, a Show Cause notice

(‘SCN’) dated 10.05.2013 was issued invoking extended period of

limitation, proposing to demand of service tax amounting to

Rs.12,46,551/- (including education cess and secondary & higher

education cess) under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 (‘Act’)

along with interest under Section 75 of the Act and imposition of

penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Act. The Appellant

filed detailed reply to the SCN. After following the due process, the

Adjudicating Authority vide OIO dated 28.02.2014, adjudicated the

SCN and confirmed the demand of Rs.11,01,724/- by extending the

benefit of cum-tax value and dropping the demand towards interest

charged on delayed payments. The Adjudicating Authority also

imposed a penalty equivalent to the tax amount under Section 78 of

the Act and a penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Section 77 of the Act.

Aggrieved by the said OIO, the Appellant filed appeal before the

3 ST/60261/2016

Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned OIA, has rejected

the appeal of the Appellant. Hence, the present appeal.

3. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record.

4. The learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the

impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been

passed without properly appreciating the facts & the law and the

binding judicial precedents.

4.1 The learned Counsel further submits that the Appellant is a

society formed by members for promoting the game of golf. The

receipts from members such as membership fees, subscriptions and

related charges are governed by the principle of mutuality i.e. the

contributors and the beneficiaries being identical. He further submits

that it is a settled law that a person cannot make profit out of

himself and therefore, any services or facilities provided by a club to

its members cannot be considered a service between two distinct

persons and hence cannot be subjected to service tax. He further

submits that this issue is no more res integra and has been settled

by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal

vs. Calcutta Club Ltd – 2019 (29) GSTL 545 (SC) wherein the

Hon’ble Supreme Court has affirmed that incorporated or registered

clubs and associations were outside the scope of service tax levy

prior to 01.07.2012 and that the doctrin