2017 (7) TMI 651 - HC - Service Tax

Agency Commission - Whether the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad is correct in setting aside the Order in Original dated 30/10/2009 without giving any finding on service tax liability of the respondent on Agency Commission from Maruti Udyog Ltd., DGS&D and nonregistration of the respondent s unit No.1 i.e. 21 Vidhan Sabha Marg, Lucknow? - Held that - we do not find any discussion on this aspect at all and respondent also could not show anything where this aspect has been dealt with - we are remanding the matter to Tribunal to consider this aspect and findings of Commissioner of Central Excise - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of the Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding taxable services.
2. Correctness of the judgment by Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding service tax liability on specific transactions.

Analysis:
1. The appeal raised two substantial questions of law. The first question pertained to the correctness of the Tribunal's decision on the taxability of Sale of Extended Warranty, Consumer Care Services of Registration of Vehicles, Agency Commission from Maruti Udyog Ltd., and Commission received from DGS&D. The counsel for Revenue conceded that the issue of Sale of Extended Warranty and Consumer Care Services had been adjudicated against Revenue. Regarding Agency Commission and Commission from DGS&D, it was noted that these aspects were part of the second question and hence Question (1) was not pressed further.

2. The second question revolved around the correctness of the Tribunal's decision to set aside the Order in Original without addressing the service tax liability on Agency Commission from Maruti Udyog Ltd., DGS&D, and non-registration of the respondent's unit. The Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax had provided detailed explanations on the Agency Commission and DGS&D Commission by Maruti Udyog Ltd., stating that they were liable to pay service tax. However, the Tribunal's order did not address this aspect, prompting the High Court to remand the matter back to the Tribunal for further consideration. The High Court directed the Tribunal to review the findings of the Commissioner and make a decision after hearing both parties within two months.

3. Ultimately, the High Court disposed of the appeal by remanding the matter to the Tribunal for a more thorough examination of the service tax liability on Agency Commission from Maruti Udyog Ltd. and Commission received from DGS&D. The Court emphasized the need for the Tribunal to consider the Commissioner's findings and make a decision in accordance with the law.