3. The appellant filed this appeal challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the imposition of Service Tax in respect of the 'Mandap Keeper' was upheld.4. The only contention of the appellant in this appeal is that they were providing the place for religious ceremony such as marriage. The contention is that marriage is religious ceremony, therefore, imposition of Service Tax in uncalled for. The appellant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Krishna Mutt to submit that the marriage is a religious ceremony, therefore, is not covered under the scope of Service Tax.
5. The ld. SDR appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the appellant is a society registered under M.P. Society Registration Act and they are providing space i.e. one hall and attached rooms for consideration for organizing social functions, therefore, are covered under the definition of 'Mandap Keeper' as provided under the Finance Act. The Revenue also submitted that the ratio of the decision relied upon by the appellant is not applicable on the facts of the present case. As the Tribunal after considering that Krishna Mutt is a religious place and marriage ceremony are organized in the Mutt and without any consideration, therefore, is not covered under the scope of Mandap Keeper. The ratio of the decision is not applicable on the facts of the present case. The Revenue also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ofTamil Nadu Kalyana Mandapam Assn.
v. Union of India 6. We find that in the statement of facts, the appellant stated that they are social organizations and also registered under the M.P.Societies Registration Act. It is also an admitted fact that they are providing hall and rooms for consideration for organizing the marriages. As per the provisions of Section 65 of Finance Act 'Mandap Keeper' means a person who allows temporary occupation of a mandap for consideration for organizing any official, social or business function.
7. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tamil Nadu Kalyana Mandap Assn (supra) upheld that the constitutional validity of provisions of Section 65 of finance Act considering all the aspects.
The issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was in respect of the liability of Service Tax as 'Mandap Keeper' on Kalyana Mandapams and Mundapams, which is providing place for conducting marriages and the Hon'ble Court held that service tax is leviable as Mandapams as Mandap Keeper. The reliance of the appellant in the case of Krishnapur Mutt (supra) will also not help the case of the appellant, as in that case the marriage is organized without any consideration that too in the Mutt. In view of the above decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court which is in respect of Kalyana Mandapams which provides place for consideration for organizing marriage, We find no infirmity in the impugned order, the appeal is dismissed.