TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e buyers on the appellant transpires that they placed orders for supply of the goods manufactured by the appellant. There were no separate agreements between the buyers and appellant for providing any service, over and above supply of goods - there is no involvement of a service provider and a service receiver relationship in the sale transaction made between the parties. Since transportation cost incurred was in context with delivery of goods at the buyers premises, it cannot be said that such facility extended by the appellant should be considered as a taxable service, leviable to service tax under the category of 'business support service' - thus, the activities undertaken by the appellant, do not confirm to the definition of taxable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidered as a taxable service under the category of 'Business Support Service'. Accordingly, show cause proceedings were initiated against the appellant, which culminated into the adjudication order dated 02/09/2014, wherein service tax demand of ₹ 16,97,498/- was confirmed along with interest. Besides, equal amount of penalty was also imposed on the appellant under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. On appeal, Learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 13/03/2015 has upheld the adjudged demand confirmed on the appellant. Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for appellant submits that delivery charges collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service provider and a service receiver relationship in the sale transaction made between the parties. Further, we also find that the invoices issued by the appellant reflected the assessable value of goods, statutory levies, and transportation cost etc. Since transportation cost incurred was in context with delivery of goods at the buyers premises, it cannot be said that such facility extended by the appellant should be considered as a taxable service, leviable to service tax under the category of 'business support service'. Further, the appellant, in the present case, had not supported the business of the buyers in any manner and arrangement of transportation was just to facilitate delivery of the duty paid excisable goods at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
