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

2013 (10) TMI 1155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l Motors (P) Ltd. 2008 (9) STR 275 [2007 (10) TMI 552 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] - demand confirmed - decided against the assessee. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- In respect of time bar, the contention of the assessee is that there was a confusion in the Board's circular whether the activity comes under the business auxiliary service or not. We find that MUL was paying service tax on the commission received from various banks/finances institutions. MUL advised the assessee to get registered with the Service Tax department and to pay service tax on this activity. In spite of this, the assessee had not paid service tax though got registered with the Revenue as provider of taxable service in October, 2004. - Decided against the assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 291/- has been demanded towards Service Tax on such commission. (c) Commission received from M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (M/s. MUL) on account of sales/target incentive, incentive on sale of vehicles and incentive on sale spare parts for promoting and marketing the products of M/s. MUL. Rs.47,32,807/- has been demanded towards this service. 4. The adjudicating authority in respect of commission received from various banks and institutions through MUL confirmed the demand of Rs.41,46,054/- and dropped the demand of Rs.20,36,250/-. 5. In respect of commission received from the banks/finance institutions for arranging auto/finance loan to their prospective buyers by acting as Direct Sales Agents, an amount of Rs.40,21,291/- is confirmed. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lties were set aside. 9. The contention of the Revenue is that on merits, the issue is settled by the following decisions of the Tribunal in the case of (1) CCE, Jaipur vs Chambal Motors (P) Ltd. - 2008 (9) STR (Tri-Del.); (2) City Motors Financial Services vs. CCE, Gurgaon - 2012 (25) STR 449 (3) CCE, Jaipur vs Ajmer Automobiles (P) Ltd. - 2012 (26) STR 19 (Tri-Del.) The contention of the Revenue is that in the above decisions, the Tribunal had held that the car dealers promoting car loans of their client banks/financial institutions are covered under the definition of business auxiliary service under Section 65(19) of Finance Act, 1994 and the assessee are promoting and marketing of services provided by the client, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the assessee respondent is that MUL has paid the service tax on the gross amount received from the bank/finance institutions including the commission passed on the present assessee respondent, therefore, demanding service tax on the same amount amounts to double taxation. The Revenue has not challenged the finding of the adjudicating authority that Maruti Finance has already paid service tax of Rs.20,36,250/- on the gross amount received from Bank/finance institution including the commission passed on the present respondent. 14. In respect of the incentive on account of sales/target incentive, incentive on sale of vehicles and incentive on sale of spare parts for promoting and marketing the products of MUL, the contention is that these .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of this, the assessee had not paid service tax though got registered with the Revenue as provider of taxable service in October, 2004. In view of this, we find no merit in the contention of the assessee that the extended period is not invokable. 17. In respect of the appeal filed by the Revenue, we find that MUL has already paid service tax of Rs.20,36,250/- on the gross amount received from various banks/finance institutions including the commission passed on to the assessee. This fact is not under challenge in the present appeal. We, therefore, agree with the assessee that demanding duty on the same amount again amounts to double taxation. 18. In respect of sales/target incentive, the revenue wants to tax this activity under the categ .....

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