Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2014 (5) TMI 915 - AT - Service TaxValuation of services - clearing and forwarding agent service - whether the demurrage/wharfage and expenses for local transport are includible in the assessable value of the service - Held that - In terms of the respondent s contract with PCL the respondent maintain godown at their principal s cost at various places for storage of cements and maintain proper records of receipt and dispatch of the cement. They are fully responsible for making arrangements for unloading/loading at railway stations/godowns and transportation thereof to various dealers/ stockiests as per the directions of their principal. The wharfage/ demurrage is charged by the railways on account of detention of the goods in the rakes or at railway premises beyond the permissible period. This amount charged by the railways is paid by the respondent and is reimbursed to them on actual basis. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has given a finding that he has examined a few samples of the railway receipts regarding demurrage/wharfage charges and he finds that the said amount are shown to have been received from PCL and that in view of this he finds that the appellan s submission that they had acted only as a pure agent is correct. As regards the local transport the same is arranged by the respondent for sending the goods to the PCL s godowns on their behalf or sending the same to various parties on the instructions of PCL. As per the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) the goods are loaded in the trucks/lorries mentioning PCL as the consignor and the appellant pay the freight only as an agent of PCL for which they are reimbursed. Here also the respondent would have to be treated as pure agent of the PCL for payment of expenses for local transport. Thus in respect of both demurrage/wharfage charged by the railways and expenses on local transport the respondent have acted only as agent of PCL and as such the expenses for these items reimbursed to them on actual basis by their principal - PCL would be not includible in the assessable value of the C&F agent services provided by them - Decided against Revenue.
|