TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ursable expenses or not and whether the decisions relied upon would apply to the case, we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority. Penalty imposed is unwarranted and is set aside. Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand. - ST/297/2009 & ST/298/2009 - 43071-43072/2017 - Dated:- 6-12-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Ms. Radhika Chandrasekar, Advocate - For the Appellant Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) - For the Respondent ORDER Per: Bench The appellants are engaged in providing clearing and forwarding agency service. They entered into agreement with M/s.IOCL as clearing and forwarding agent. During the period from 15.12.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ST Vs Sangamitra Services Agencies - 2014 (33) STR 137 (Mad.) and Intercontinental Consultant and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI - 2012 (12) TMI 150 and argued that the amount being reimbursable expenses received by the appellant cannot be added to the taxable value relating to clearing and forwarding agency service. It is also argued by the ld. counsel that the issue whether the amounts so received are subject to levy of service tax being reimbursable expenses was under litigation and therefore the penalty may be set aside. 3. Ld. A.R Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy opposed the appeals. He submitted that as per the clause relating to infrastructure shown in the agreement, it is stated that appellant has to make arrangements as well as cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s L.S. Rs.2,91,000/- Per month (Rupees two lakhs ninety one thousand only per month) Rs.2,91,000/- Thus, it is seen from the above price schedule that appellant is receiving a fixed amount of ₹ 2,91,000/- as charges for infrastructure facilities and it is not clear whether these are actual receipts by the appellant which requires verification. Further it is also to be clarified whether these charges are borne by the appellant on behalf of IOCL. In respect of the above two issues, we consider it is deemed fit to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority who shall verify the documents produced by the appellant and analyse whether amount of ₹ 2,91,000/- received by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
