9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 dt. 15.10.2008 certified on 30.10.2008 in Appeal No. ST/208/2006) Shri A. Mohanan, Chartered Accountant for the Appellants. Ms. Joy Kumari Chander, Jt. CDR for the Respondent. [Order per T.K. Jayaraman Member (Technical)] - This appeal has been filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 84/2006- ST dated 29.3.2006, passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Cochin. 2. Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 75 was demanded. A penalty equal to the service tax amount was imposed under Section 78 of the Act. No penalties were imposed under Section 76 & 77 of the Act since the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act is for the same. The appellants approached the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) after examining the issue upheld the order of the lower authority. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the courier are in the name of the Principal. It was urged that for convenience, the appellants are paying the bills at the first instance, which are subsequently reimbursed by the Principal on actual basis. 5. It was urged that the appellant, for the C&F agency was receiving a commission of Rs. 40,000/- per month from 1999 which has been enhanced to Rs. 53,000/- per month on renewal from 1st Nov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C & F agent and it is only by way of reimbursement of actual. It was submitted that a sum of Rs. 12,04,256/- being amount reimbursed by the Principal to the appellant as part of its C & F operations should not be included as storage and warehouse services and is not exigible to the service tax. The following case laws were relied on: (i) Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai- 2005 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
