9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sea(d) Export consol air and (e) Export consol sea and confirmed the levy of service tax in respect of some services such as Air freight commission, Sea freight commission, Service Charges, Documentation charges, airport/port truck charges, and other direct reimbursements GE India Industrial (P) Ltd.etc. 2. The Department filed appeal against the demands which were set aside demanding service tax in respect of services received from Overseas Commission Agent, under reverse charge. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority. The Appellant was directed specifically to furnish the details of amounts received, details of reimbursable expenses and nature of expenses, as below: "5. As submitted by Ld. A.R., in the absence of invoice wise statement to be whether amount of reimbursable expenses are actually reimbursable or not gross value of service cannot be worked out. In view of the fact that the applicant had not worked out the gross value of the service invoice wise, it is proper that the appellants submit a worksheet showing invoice wise details of amounts received, details of reimbursable expense and the nature of expenses that are not included or the oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. These were meant for export of goods. For this activity they received commission from the airlines. It is the contention of the Appellant that this service was rendered in connection with export of goods and therefore, no service tax will be leviable on such services. 10.2 The Appellant stated that the issue is squarely covered by the decision in the case of * M/s Robinson Air Services Vs. CCE, Delhi Final Order No. 53632/2016 dated 16.09.2016; *Airogo Travels and Cargo Pvt Ltd., Final Order No. 43487/2017 dated 19.09.2017. 10.3 We observe that the services rendered by the Appellant were related to export of goods and hence there is no liability of service tax on the commission received from the airlines in connection with the goods exported. We find that this view has been held in Robinson Air Services Vs. CCE, Delhi, Final Order No. 43487/2017 dated 19.09.2017 and Airogo Travels and Cargo Pvt Ltd., Final Order No. 43487/2017 dated 19.09.2017. 10.4. Hence, we hold that the demand confirmed in the impugned order on this count is not sustainable. 11. Service charges 11.1 This amount is related to charges received for issuance of delivery orders etc. The Appellant stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority has accepted their contention in respect of those 40 entries in the order-in-original. The appellant stated that since the data is huge and bulky, from the year 2002-03 to 2006-07, they requested the Adjudicating Authority to depute an officer to the Appellant's premises to verify the remaining invoices, in case he has any doubt about the nature of reimbursements in respect of the remaining entries and submitted a worksheet containg all reimbursements. This fact has been recorded in the impugned order by the adjudicating authority . Therefore, it is not open to the Adjudicating Authority to confirm the demand on the ground that all invoices have not been produced. 12.5 We observe that the issue as to whether reimbursable expenses are liable to be taxed or not is settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd., (2018) TIOL 76-SC-ST wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has affirmed the decision of the Delhi High Court striking down Rule 5(1) of the Valuation Rules, 2006, which provides for inclusion of expenditure or costs incurred by the service provider in the course of providing taxable servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interpreting Sections 66 and 67 to say that in the valuation of taxable service, the value of taxable service shall be the gross amount charged by the service provider 'for such service' and the valuation of tax service cannot be anything more or less than the consideration paid as quid pro qua for rendering such a service. 25. This position did not change even in the amended Section 67 which was inserted on May 01, 2006. Sub-Section (4) of Section 67 empowers the rule making authority to lay down the manner in which value of taxable service is to be determined. However, Section 67(4) is expressly made subject to the provisions of subsection (1). Mandate of sub-section (1) of Section 67 is manifest, as noted above, viz., the service tax is to be paid only on the services actually provided by the service provider. As the issue has already been settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court cited above, we hold that the demand confirmed on the reimbursable expenses in the impugned order is not sustainable. 13. Pickup charges: 13.1 Under this head the Appellant has shown transportation charges and loading and unloading charges. The Appellant stated that on the transportati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
