9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere discharging service tax under the category of "Clearing and Forwarding Agency Service". The dispute in the present appeal relates to valuation of the said taxable service. In terms of the agreement, M/s. HUL provided various facilities to the appellants. M/s. HUL also paid consideration under various headings to the appellants. The case against the appellants is that the appellants have not discharged service tax on various components/considerations/reimbursements received from M/s. HUL. These amounts are under the category of reimbursement on depreciation of plant and machinery, reimbursement of bank interest on actual basis on loans taken by the appellant, return on investment made by the appellant and notional value of rent free acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1994. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Bhagwati Traders - 2011 (24) STR 290 (Tribunal-LB) held that the terms of the contract should stipulate regarding the nature of reimbursable expenditure. The Tribunal further held that the costs for input services and inputs used for rendering services cannot be treated as reimbursable costs. The cost of service cannot be artificially split as reimbursable expenses. 4. Ld. Counsel submitted that the Tribunal later in various decisions held that if the C & F agent has received amount as reimbursable expenses in terms of clear contractual arrangement and acted as pure agent in terms of Rule 5(2) of Valuation Rules, then no service tax liability can be put on such reimbursable expenditure. In vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and it will have direct bearing on the quantum of amount charged by the appellant for the services rendered to the client. Apparently, such rent free premises is a non-monetary consideration received by the appellant for rendering the services. Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 clearly stipulates that when the considerations for provision of service is partly consisting of money, the other considerations should be arrived at in money terms, for tax purposes. As such, we find no merit in the submissions made by the appellant against the inclusion of the notional rent for tax liability as a part of consideration. 8. Regarding the issue of limitation, we have perused the copies of ST-3 returns filed by the appellants. They have mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
