2020 (2) TMI 1446 - AT - Service Tax

Nature of activity - service or not - reduction of prices in vehicles, effective for purchase by the ultimate customers - Business Auxiliary service or not - HELD THAT - The transaction between the appellant and M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd. is of sale and purchase of vehicle and due to the mandate of deciding the sales price of vehicle to ultimate customers, appellant had to sell vehicle at the price lower than the price at which they had purchased the said goods and as a discount for doing the same, appellant received the aforesaid amount - thus, the said amount has to be treated as discount and also that element of service is not involved. The Service Tax of around ₹ 10 lakhs demanded from the appellant is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispute over the treatment of amount received by the appellant from M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd.
2. Classification of the amount received as 'business auxiliary service' for Service Tax purposes.

Analysis:
1. The dispute in the appeal revolved around the amount of &8377; 87,57,484/- received by the appellant from M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd. The appellants were dealers of vehicles of M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd., purchasing and selling vehicles to customers. During a specific period, M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd. reduced prices for customers, resulting in appellants selling vehicles at a lower price than they were purchased for. To compensate for this loss, the appellants received the aforementioned amount. Revenue treated this amount as 'business auxiliary service,' leading to a demand for Service Tax of approximately &8377; 10 lakhs.

2. Upon reviewing the transaction and considering arguments from both sides, the Tribunal concluded that the interaction between the appellant and M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd. primarily involved the sale and purchase of vehicles. The appellants were mandated to sell vehicles at a lower price than the purchase price due to pricing decisions by M/s. Honda Siel Cars Ltd. The amount received was deemed a discount for adhering to this mandate, with no element of service involved. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the amount should be treated as a discount and not as a business auxiliary service. As a result, the demand for Service Tax of around &8377; 10 lakhs was considered unsustainable, leading to the impugned order being set aside, and the appeal being allowed.

This detailed analysis highlights the core issues of the judgment, focusing on the treatment of the amount received by the appellant and the classification for Service Tax purposes, ultimately leading to the Tribunal's decision in favor of the appellant.