TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - demand set aside - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/85256/14-Mum ST/CO/91080/14-Mum - A/91645/17 - Dated:- 21-12-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Atul Sharma, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for appellant Shri Arun Kumar, Advocate, for respondent ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No.437/BPS/MUM/2013 dated 14.10.2013 and is filed by the Revenue. The respondent has filed a cross objection. Both are taken up for disposal. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration after filtering out unnecessary details, are the respondent herein is registered with the department under the category of clearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icates that the respondent is supervising the products dispatched by the principal to M/s. Emmellen Biotech Pharmaceutical Ltd. He would also take the Bench through the agreement entered by the respondent with M/s. J.K. Pharma Chem Ltd. and points out the same clauses and submits that the activity undertaken by the respondent would fall under the category of clearing and forwarding services. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the entire agreement entered into with M/s. Emmellen Biotech Pharmaceutical Ltd., M/s. J.K. Pharma Chem Ltd. and M/s. Alembic Ltd. is nothing but procurement of orders and earning a commission on such transactions entered. It is his further submission that post 2004, the respondent has star ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent to procuring the orders on the prices fixed by the manufacturer and nothing more than this. The said agreement does not indicate that the respondent is required to store the goods and dispatch the same to the purchasers. We find that the first appellate authority in the impugned order in para 6 to 14 has categorically recorded detailed findings as to how the activity of the respondent would not fall under the category of clearing and forwarding agent services. We find that the Revenue is not able to controvert the said findings effectively. 8. As correctly pointed out by the learned counsel, the issue now stands settled in their favour by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Larsen Toubro (supra). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
