2017 (4) TMI 39 - AT - Service Tax

Valuation of taxable service - clearing and forwarding agent service - whether reimbursable expenditures like ground rent, telephone, postal charges, electricity etc. on actual basis are be included in the taxable value? - Held that - there is no dispute regarding these expenditures having been incurred by the appellant in terms of the agreement and also being reimbursed on actual basis by their client. The appellants are not disputing their service tax liability on the agency commission and remuneration received for providing C & F services - reliance placed in the case of Commissioenr of Serivde Tax, Chennai vs. Sangamitra services Agency 2013 (7) TMI 862 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , where Relying upon the judgment in the case of Sri Sastha Agencies Pvt Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner reported in 2006(11)TMI 193- CESTAT, BANGALORE, wherein it is held that no element other than remuneration received by a Clearing & Forwarding agent from their principal was to be included in the taxable value of the service - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Valuation of taxable service in a case involving clearing and forwarding agency services.

Analysis:
The appeal in this case was against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals-I), Jaipur, regarding the valuation of taxable service provided by the appellants as a clearing and forwarding agency. The dispute centered around whether reimbursable expenditures incurred by the appellants, such as ground rent, telephone charges, postal charges, and electricity, should be included in the taxable value for the purpose of service tax. The Revenue argued that all expenses incurred by the appellants during the provision of C & F services should be part of the gross value for service tax calculation.

The appellant contended that they should only pay service tax on the agency commission and remuneration received for providing C & F services, excluding the reimbursable expenditures. The appellant's position was supported by the written agreement with the client, which stipulated that reimbursable expenses were to be reimbursed on an actual basis. The lower authorities acknowledged these facts, but the Revenue insisted that reimbursable expenditures should be included in the gross value for service tax calculation.

The Tribunal noted that there was no dispute regarding the nature and categories of reimbursable expenditures incurred by the appellant and reimbursed by the client. The settled legal position, as highlighted in previous judgments, indicated that reimbursable expenses should not be considered part of the assessable value of the C & F services. The Tribunal cited decisions by the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the Tribunal in support of this position, emphasizing that reimbursable expenses should not be added to the value of the services provided.

Based on the established legal position and precedents, the Tribunal found no merit in the impugned order and set it aside, thereby allowing the appeal. The decision highlighted the importance of examining the terms of the agreement between the service provider and recipient to determine the treatment of reimbursable expenses in the valuation of taxable services.