Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + Commissioner Service Tax - 2013 (2) TMI Commissioner This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (2) TMI 328 - Commissioner - Service TaxTransaction charges or Turnover charges – whether the appellant is liable to pay Service tax on the transaction charges or turnover charges collected – Appellant are engaged in the business of stock broking registered with the department under the category of “Stock Broking Services “ and “Banking and Financial Services” – Also collected turnover charges or transaction charges of the total value of transaction from their clients through their branches for the services provided to their clients. This amount was paid to the stock exchange for getting the Computer to Computer Link (CTCL) facility appellant - Held that:- It is the obligation of the stock broker to collect a specified percentage as transaction charges on their traded value from their clients and pass the same to the respective stock exchanges. The appellant is collecting the transaction charges from his clients as a ‘pure agent’ as per Rule 5(2) of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 and pass the same to the stock exchange. Further it is not the case where stock broker had collected any excess amount from his clients and had not paid such amount to the stock exchange. The Pure Agent issue is not under dispute. Therefore, appellant are coming under the category of “Pure Agents” – Therefore turnover charges or transaction charges are not includible in the taxable value and the appellant is not liable to pay Service tax on the same during the disputed period – In favour of assessee. Cenvat credit towards employees insurance, food charges – Whether the appellant is eligible for the Cenvat credit availed on Service tax paid towards employees insurance, food charges, subscription/books/periodicals and travelling expenses – Appellant had availed credit on the Service tax paid towards employees insurance, food charges and travelling expenses which are not used in providing their output service It has been decided in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd.[ 2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] that the assessee is entitled for input service credit of the services, which are availed in course of their business and manufacturing activity. Thus, the services which were availed during the course of their business activity are eligible input services to take credit – In favour of assessee. Credit taken on debit notes – Whether the appellant is entitled for the credit taken on debit notes issued by their associate company – Held that:- The appellant submitted that the relevant debit note is a valid document. This implies that all the relevant details required as are available in any invoice are available in these debit notes. Hence, the details available in the debit notes and also the genuineness of payment of Service tax by the service provider satisfy the conditions laid down in Rule 9(2) of CCR, 2004 for permitting Cenvat credit. Also in the case of Phasrmalab Process [2009 (4) TMI 142 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] it has been held that if details required under Rule 9(2) of CCR 2004 is satisfied, then the appellant is entitled for credit based on debit notes – In favour of assessee.
|