9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 756 - AT - Service TaxLevy of Service Tax - Banking and other Financial Services - amount deducted by the foreign bank towards the bank charges - period 2011-12 - HELD THAT - The very same issue has been settled in favour of the appellant in its own case in Service Tax Appeal No. 40204 of 2013 decided by this very Bench in M/S. SKM EGG PRODUCTS EXPORT (I) LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS) , ANNAI MEDU SALEM. 2023 (3) TMI 1384 - CESTAT CHENNAI wherein this Bench, after following other orders of co-ordinate CESTAT, New Delhi in the cases of M/S. THEME EXPORTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS C.S.T., DELHI 2018 (5) TMI 825 - CESTAT NEW DELHI and M/S DILEEP INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS CCE, JAIPUR 2017 (10) TMI 1231 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , has held that the appellant cannot be treated as service recipient and no service tax can be charged under Section 66A read with Rule 2 (1)(2)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The issue in the case on hand stands settled in favour of appellant and consequently, the impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed.
Issues involved: Determination of taxability of amount deducted by foreign bank towards bank charges under "Banking and Other Financial Service" for the period 2011-12.
Summary: Issue 1: Taxability of amount deducted by foreign bank towards bank charges The appellant, a manufacturer of various powdered products, exported goods and received lesser export proceeds due to deductions by foreign banks for bank charges. The Service Tax authorities issued a Show Cause Notice demanding Service Tax, interest, and penalties. The appellant contended that the issue was settled in their favor in a previous case. The Tribunal, after considering previous decisions, found that the foreign bank charges were not taxable under "Banking and Other Financial Services" as the services were rendered to the Indian bank, not directly to the appellant. Relying on earlier judgments, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's claim and set aside the impugned order. Conclusion: The Tribunal held that the amount deducted by the foreign bank towards bank charges was not taxable under "Banking and Other Financial Services" for the period 2011-12. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, with consequential benefits as per law.
|
