TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of recalculation of tax payable - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Service Tax Appeal No. 55604 & 55072 of 2014 - ST/A/52086-52087/2018-CU[DB] - Dated:- 25-5-2018 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C L Mahar, Member (Technical) Shri Abhishek Jaju, Advocate for the Appellants Shri G R Singh, AR for the Respondent Per: Anil Choudhary: The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant-assessee, a Clearing and Forwarding agent have been rightly subjected to demand of additional Service Tax as short paid. 2. Brief facts as per the show cause notice are that the appellant is engaged in providing services under the classification Clearing and Forwarding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 8,52,333/- was confirmed allowing benefit of appropriation of ₹ 5 lakh pre-paid as per earlier directions of this Tribunal along with equal amount of penalty under section 78 and further penalty of ₹ 5000/- and penalty of ₹ 200/- per day for delay in furnishing of each return from the due date till the date of furnishing of the same. Penalty was also imposed under section 76. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals) who under the impugned order has been pleased to confirm the demand, denying the deductions being claimed by the appellant, being amounts received by them as pure agent, by way of reimbursement. However, the learned Commissioner was pleased to set aside the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e agent will be paid a commission/ remuneration of 5% of all the payment made by the agent on behalf of the company. 7. Thus, the learned counsel states that it is apparent and crystal clear that what the agent has received as remuneration is only 5%, as provided in the agreement over and above the amount of expenditure actually incurred on behalf of the company. Further, the learned counsel points out from the impugned order that the learned Commissioner denied the benefit of the amounts received as reimbursement on the ground that the appellant did not furnish the required details to the adjudicating authority as per the bifurcations of the amounts received. Further, the court below have placed reliance on Rule 6(8) of Service Tax Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
