Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

C.M. Sapkal Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur

2016 (3) TMI 856 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Liability of Service tax - Rendering of Business auxiliary service - Amounts received as 'commission agent' subject to a minimum of ₹ 1,10,000/- per month falls within the definition of 'business auxiliary service' in section 65 (19) of Finance Act, 1994 - Held that:- the claim of the appellant for immunity from taxability under section 65(105) (zzb) is not tenable. Therefore, the impugned order is modified by recomputing the tax liability along with appropriate interest. - Seeking set .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by Tribunal in the case of re Infinity Credit. Therefore, for reasonableness of doubt that individuals may not be 'commercial concerns', section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 be invoked and penalty imposed under Section 78 is set aside. - Cum-tax computation - Rental of immovable property - Appellant is the custodian of the goods intended for sale - Held that:- the remuneration that was to be made over to the appellant is based on quantum of sale. Guarantee of minimum payment of ₹ 1,10,000 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at M/s Style Spa is responsible for discharge of tax liability. In view of these facts, the plea of the appellant for 'cum-tax' computation is justified. - Appeal disposed of - Appeal No. ST/255/2011 - Final Order No. A/86250/2016-WZB/STB - Dated:- 7-3-2016 - M V Ravindran, Member (J) And C J Mathew, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri D H Nadkarni, Adv For the Respondent : Shri B Kumar, Superintendent (AR) ORDER Per C J Mathew M/s C M Sakpal, the appellant, is before us seeking to quash the ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mission agent' which falls within the definition of 'business auxiliary service' in section 65 (19) of Finance Act, 1994. The appellant entered into an 'agreement of retail agency' with M/s Style Spa in January 2004 in accordance with which the appellant provided its space in a commercial building for exhibiting the products of M/s Style Spa which were to be delivered by the appellants to customers on instructions. The appellants were responsible for collecting and remitting .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

105)(zzb) of Finance Act, 1994 which restricted tax on 'business auxiliary service' to that rendered by 'commercial concern' till the amendment therein on 1 st June 2006. Citing decisions of the Tribunal in Infinity Credit v Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [2009 (16) STR 61 (Tri-Del)] and Mangal Singh v Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I [2008 (11) STR 17 (Tri-Del)], it was contended an HUF is a group of individuals and hence its assets cannot be considered to have b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

39; to support the case of Revenue. 6. We find that the definition of 'business auxiliary service' includes that rendered by a 'commission agent' since the introduction of the taxable entry but 'commission agents' were exempted from the purview of tax by notification no. 13/2003-ST dated 20 th June 2003. However, the said exemption was restricted to sale and purchase of agricultural produce vide notification no. 8/2004-ST dated 9 th July 2004. Commission agent was defined .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of HUF are individuals and that the decisions cited supra exclude individuals from being taxed as 'commercial concern'. We find that the decisions were rendered in the limited context of imposition of penalties. Indeed, in re Infinity Credit, the Tribunal observed: "4. Learned Company Secretary fairly concedes that the issue whether a proprietary firm can be considered as a commercial concern has been decided by the Tribunal against the assessee in the case of C.C.E., Jaipur vs. R. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version