TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorities in respect of the appellant's client who were undertaking the liasioning work with the authorities. Therefore, the service tax liability, as confirmed, is incorrect as the said amounts on which tax liability has been raised is nothing but reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the appellant for the licence fees, etc. Disallowance of Cenvat credit - Held that:- the said amount is in respect of service tax paid on broad band services, courier services, internet and automobile service stations. These services are utilised by the appellant for rendering the output services i.e. "Management Consultancy Services". Therefore, the appellant was and is eligible to avail Cenvat credit of this amount. Accordingly the impugned order i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordingly, the impugned order is set aside to that extent. As regards Service tax on reimbursement of expenses in the capacity of pure agent, it is the claim of the appellant that these tax liabilities is also on the reimbursable expenses in the capacity of pure agent but it is found that it is not so. It is noted that the appellant has been charging more than the expenditure incurred by him as a pure agent while billing the clients. So, the claim of the appellant that of a pure agent in these demands seems to be without any evidence as there is no dispute that the appellant had charged additional amount other than the amount paid as reimbursable expenses. Therefore, the service tax liability is upheld along with interest and is liable fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt towards the services but are in respect of various fees paid to DGFT authorities towards the application fees, licence fees, etc. It is also seen from the records that the demand drafts are raised in the name of DGFT authorities and receipts are issued by DGFT authorities in respect of the appellants client who were undertaking the liasioning work with the authorities. We are convinced that the service tax liability, as confirmed in the case in hand, is incorrect as the said amounts on which tax liability has been raised is nothing but reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the appellant for the licence fees, etc. 5. As regards the disallowance of cenvat credit of ₹ 1,249/-, we find that the said amount is in respect of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax on reimbursement of expenses received in the capacity of Pure agent 76,567/- 5. Service tax on receipt of amount towards reimbursement of statutory expenses amounting to ₹ 1,07,179/- 12,822/- 6 Service tax on reimbursement of expenses in the capacity of pure agent 5,23,774/- 7 Interest on the amount of ₹ 3,29,419/- on the ground that service tax has been paid after the due date 3,29,419/- 7. After hearing both the sides we find that the, as regards item No. 1 and 2 in the above reproduced table the issue needs reconsideration by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able expenses in the capacity of pure agent. On perusal of the records, we find that it is not so. It is noted that the appellant has been charging more than the expenditure incurred by him as a pure agent while billing the clients. In our view, the claim of the appellant that of a pure agent in these demands seems to be without any evidence as there is no dispute that the appellant had charged additional amount other than the amount paid as reimbursable expenses. In our view the appeal of the appellant fails in respect of these amounts. Accordingly, we uphold the service tax liability along with interest thereof in respect of an amount of ₹ 5,23,774/- as tax demand and also hold that the appellant is liable to pay penalty as per Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
