9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 694 - AT - Service TaxLevy of Service Tax - Mark Up amount - difference between the amount paid by the Appellant to the Shipping Lines/Airlines and the amount recovered by the Appellant from the customers (exporter/importers) - HELD THAT - The Division Bench accepted the contention advanced on behalf of the appellant in the earlier decision that the appellant was only trading in space and was not providing any service. The Division Bench also noted that the issue involved in the Appeal was covered by the decisions of the Tribunal in GREENWICH MERIDIAN LOGISTICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX MUMBAI 2016 (4) TMI 547 - CESTAT MUMBAI and COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, NEW DELHI VERSUS M/S. KARAM FREIGHT MOVERS 2017 (3) TMI 785 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - The post negative list w.e.f. 01.07.2012 was also involved in the Appeal that was decided. The orders dated December 31, 2015 and February 27, 2017 passed by the Commissioner with penalty and interest deserve to be set aside and are set aside - Appeal allowed.
Issues:
1. Appellant challenging service tax demand for the periods 2013-14 and 2014-15. 2. Interpretation of "mark-up" charges as liable for service tax under "Support Services of Business or Commerce [BSS]" category. 3. Comparison of appellant's business activities with trading in space rather than providing services. 4. Impact of the post-negative list regime effective from July 2012 on service tax liability. 5. Previous appeal decision for the period 2008-09 to 2012-13 and its relevance to the current appeals. Analysis: 1. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI heard Service Tax Appeal No. 50411 of 2016 and Service Tax Appeal No. 51262 of 2017 where the appellant contested the service tax demand confirmed by the Commissioner for the periods 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. 2. The dispute revolved around the classification of the "mark-up" charges by the appellant for providing cargo space to importers/exporters. The Department argued that such mark-up constituted taxable services under the "Support Services of Business or Commerce [BSS]" category post-July 2012. 3. The appellant's activities were likened to trading in space rather than offering services, as upheld in previous tribunal decisions such as Greenwich Meridian Logistics (India) Pvt Ltd. v. Commissioner and Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi v. Karam Freight Movers. 4. The Tribunal considered the impact of the post-negative list regime effective from July 2012 on the service tax liability, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive analysis of the nature of services provided by the appellant. 5. Reference was made to a previous appeal decision for the period 2008-09 to 2012-13, where the appellant successfully challenged the demand of service tax. The appellant argued that the issues involved in the decided appeals were similar to the present ones, leading to the allowance of the current appeals and setting aside of the Commissioner's orders with penalty and interest. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, highlighting the appellant's trading in space rather than providing services and the applicability of previous tribunal decisions in determining the service tax liability. The impact of the post-negative list regime on service tax obligations was also a crucial factor in setting aside the Commissioner's orders.
|
