9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d into an agreement on 05.01.2005 with National Co-operative Consumer Federation of India Ltd., New Delhi (NCCF). Through the said agreement, respondent-assessee were appointed to act as handling and distribution agent for lifting, transportation and distribution of any variety of coal, allocated by the Coal Companies in favour of NCCF. If appeared to Revenue that respondent was engaged and promotion, marketing and sale of goods belonging to NCCF and therefore there was allegation by Revenue that the respondent was providing business auxiliary services. The respondent was issued with a show cause notice dated 02.12.2009 in which it was alleged that NCCF was their client and respondent was engaged in promotion, marketing and sale of goods be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) decided the appeal through impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 31.08.2010. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that Clause 7 of the agreement dated 05.01.2005 was the crux of the entire agreement which decided the nature of transaction and that it has been clearly mentioned therein that payment against the orders procured from consumers was to be collected in advance alongwith service charge of NCCF and was to be deposited with NCCF before lifting the coal from collieries and that the nature of transaction was sale of coal on advance payment and that could not be termed as any service provided on behalf of NCCF. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) further observed that the service charge of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat there was no consideration being received from the so called client i.e. NCCF and therefore they were not rendering any service to NCCF. 6. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that in para-13 of the show cause notice it is contended that the respondent is engaged in promotion, marketing and sale of goods belonging to its client NCCF, whereas the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that there is no consideration being received by respondent-assessee from NCCF and therefore, respondent-assessee is not providing any service to NCCF. From the clauses of the agreement, having been presented by learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, it is clear that there is no consideration flowing from NCCF to respondent-assessee tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
