2016 (9) TMI 1025 - AT - Service Tax

Service tax liability - valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - clearing and forwarding services - gross amount received by the respondent while providing the C&F service - Held that - by following the decisions of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats Pvt. Ltd, Vs. UOI 2012 (12) TMI 150 - DELHI HIGH COURT and also the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of ST, Chennai Vs. Sangamitra Services Agency 2013 (7) TMI 862 - MADRAS HIGH COURT wherein it was held that held that reimbursable expenses cannot be added in the assessable value of the C&F services, service tax is payable only on the commission and not on the reimbursable expenses. - Decided against the Revenue

Summary

Issues involved:
Interpretation of service tax laws regarding the inclusion of reimbursed expenses in the value of consideration for charging service tax on clearing and forwarding agent services.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Service Tax on Reimbursed Expenses
The appeal was filed by Revenue against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the demand of service tax on the gross amount received by the respondent for providing clearing and forwarding services. The Revenue contended that as per Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 and relevant rules, service tax is payable on the total amount received by the respondent. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that reimbursement of actual expenses incurred on behalf of principals would not be liable to service tax. The main issue revolved around whether such reimbursed expenses should be included in the value of consideration for charging service tax on the services provided by the respondent.

Issue 2: Examination of Contract Terms
The Tribunal examined the contract between the respondent and their principals to determine the nature of the payments made. The contract outlined that the respondent would receive a fixed sum plus service tax per month as remuneration for their services. Additionally, the contract specified that the respondent would be reimbursed for various expenses incurred on behalf of the principals, subject to valid vouchers and approval. The Tribunal analyzed the terms of the contract to ascertain the nature of the payments and whether the reimbursed expenses should be considered while calculating the service tax.

Issue 3: Precedents and Legal Interpretations
The Tribunal referred to previous judgments and legal interpretations to resolve the controversy. It cited cases where it was established that service tax is leviable only on the commission received by the service provider and not on reimbursable expenses. The Tribunal highlighted decisions by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal, the Hon'ble Madras High Court, and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, which all supported the notion that reimbursable expenses should not be included in the assessable value of the services provided. Relying on these precedents, the Tribunal concluded that service tax is payable only on the commission received by the clearing and forwarding agent, not on the reimbursed expenses.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, stating that service tax is payable solely on the commission received by the clearing and forwarding agent, and not on the reimbursed expenses incurred on behalf of the principals.