2024 (3) TMI 1044 - AT - Service Tax

Classification of services - Clearing and Forwarding Agents or not - testing the quality of silk received from the reelers and stock it for being sold in open auction to various agencies like the appellant, Handloom Silk Weavers Cooperative Societies and Twisters - HELD THAT - The facts of the present case are more or less akin to the facts of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS M/S. THE SALEM STARCH MANUFACTURERS SERVICE INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED 2013 (8) TMI 296 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , wherein also the Hon'ble High Court has held that there is no question of clearing and forwarding agents service involved and consequently there was no liability to service tax under the said category. The demand of service tax on the appellant under the category of Clearing and Forwarding Agents Service is not sustainable, for which reason, the impugned order cannot sustain - the impugned order set aside - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of services under "Clearing and Forwarding Agents."
2. Liability to Service Tax and related penalties.
3. Nature of transactions and receipts by the appellant.

Summary:

1. Classification of Services under "Clearing and Forwarding Agents":
The Revenue argued that the appellant, engaged in the purchase and sale of raw silk, should be classified under "Clearing and Forwarding Agents" due to the commission and other charges collected. The appellant contended that they merely facilitated the sale of goods belonging to their members and did not provide any clearing and forwarding services. The Tribunal referred to the guiding principles laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in CCE, Salem Vs. Salem Starch & MFR's Service Ind. Co-Op Society Ltd., which clarified that merely providing a platform for sale and storage does not constitute clearing and forwarding services.

2. Liability to Service Tax and Related Penalties:
The Revenue issued four Show Cause Notices demanding service tax for the period from 1.9.1999 to 31.3.2005, along with interest and penalties. The appellant denied liability, arguing that there was no service provider-client relationship and that they were not engaged in clearing and forwarding activities. The Tribunal, following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras, held that the appellant's activities did not fit the criteria for clearing and forwarding services and thus, the demand for service tax was not sustainable.

3. Nature of Transactions and Receipts by the Appellant:
The Tribunal examined the nature of the receipts and transactions, noting that the appellant, a society, facilitated the sale and purchase of raw silk and twisted silk belonging to its members. The appellant charged a mark-up to cover administrative costs and collected godown rent for storage. The Tribunal found that these activities did not amount to clearing and forwarding services. The Tribunal also considered other decisions supporting the appellant's position.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, holding that the demand for service tax under the category of "Clearing and Forwarding Agents" was not sustainable. The appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as per law.

Order Pronounced:
(Order pronounced in open court on 22.03.2024)