2018 (2) TMI 934 - AT - Service Tax

Business Auxiliary Service - non-payment of service tax - Held that - the issue already stands decided in favour of the appellant by the Tribunal in the case of CST Mumbai-I Vs. Sai Service Station Ltd. 2013 (10) TMI 1155 - CESTAT MUMBAI where it was held that circular issued by MUL which provides certain incentives in respect of cars sold by the assessee respondent. These incentives are in the form of trade discount no demand - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Early hearing application against Order-in-Original No. 04-2012 dated 27/01/2012.
2. Appellant's liability to pay service tax on the entire amount received from M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
3. Appeal challenging the differential service tax demanded.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed along with a miscellaneous application for early hearing against Order-in-Original No. 04-2012 dated 27/01/2012. After hearing both sides, the early hearing application was allowed, and with mutual agreement, the appeal itself was taken up for final disposal. The appellant, an authorized dealer for M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., was registered and paying service tax under Business Auxiliary Service. The Department alleged non-payment of service tax on the total amount received from M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., leading to the issuance of a show-cause notice and the subsequent impugned order demanding a differential service tax of ?2,97,46,701. The appeal challenged this decision.

During the hearing, the appellant's counsel referred to a previous Tribunal decision in the case of CST, Mumbai-I Vs. Sai Service Station Ltd. The Tribunal in that case had ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that incentives received were in the form of trade discounts and not liable to be taxed under Business Auxiliary Service. Relying on this precedent, the present Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The decision was made in open court on 11/12/2017.