Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (1) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ecords. Thereafter, the respondent may pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, taking into consideration all the relevant aspects, including the decisions of the supreme Court cited by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. - WP 2671 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 5-1-2011 - M Jaichandren, J Appellant Represented by: Mrs Pushya Sitaraman Senior Adv. for Arun Kurian Joseph Respondent Represented by: Mr D Mahadevan Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) JUDGEMENT It is stated that the writ petition had been filed seeking to prohibit the respondent from levying and collecting service tax on the commission received by the petitioner, for their activity of acting as agents for a number of south Indian Tea Estate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and tea, but does not include manufactured products such as sugar, edible oils, processed food and processed tobacco. Since, the notification has clearly specified 'tea', under the head of 'Agricultural Produce', the authorities concerned would have no jurisdiction to insist that the petitioner should register itself and start paying the service tax on the commission so received. 4. It had been further stated that, in response to the queries raised by the Superintendent of Central Excise and Service Tax, Conoor, the petitioner had written a letter, dated 22.6.2009, claiming exemption on the ground that the service rendered by the petitioner firm relates to 'Agricultural Produce'. The Superintendent of Central Excise and Service Tax, Cono .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nication, dated 13.8.2009, without properly analysing the definition of 'Agricultural Produce', as in the amended notification, dated 9.7.2004. 6. A counter affidavit had been filed on behalf of the respondent denying the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It has been stated that, as per Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994, 'Business Auxiliary Service' includes services rendered as a commission agent, but does not include any activity that amounts to manufacture of excisable goods. The Government had provided exemption from service tax for 'Business Auxiliary Service' provided by the commission agent, from 1.7.2003, to 8.7.2004, vide notification No.13/2003-ST, dated 20.6.2003. Subsequently, such exempt .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing at a final conclusion. He had also submitted that the respondent would take into consideration the decision of the Supreme Court, reported in COMMISSION OF SALES TAX, LUCKNOW Vs. D.S.BIST AND OTHERS (1979) 44 STC 392 (SC), while deciding the issues arising for his consideration . 10. In view of such submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the respondent to issue a show cause notice and to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before deciding the issues arising for his consideration relating to the payment of service tax by the petitioner. It would be open to the petitioner to substantiate its claims, by producing the necessary records. Thereafter, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates