9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... client - Held that: - if any service provider procured the goods or services for the client and the same is input for the client then the services falls under the proposed category - In the facts of the present case, it is undisputed that the appellant is not procuring any goods for their clients. The goods which was referred by the lower authorities is the imported goods, which was directly impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk for payment of the price to the foreign suppliers of the goods imported by the importers. In cases where the appellants agreed to grant such facility to importers, the appellants establish the L/C through the appellant s bank in favour of the foreign supplier of the goods imported by the importer. In all such cases, the purchase orders on the foreign suppliers are placed by the importers throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before us. 2. Shri J.C. Patel, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants are providing limited services of L/C facility to their clients, who import goods on their own. The appellant is not involved in placing the order importing the goods, clearing the goods, etc. on behalf of their clients. Therefore, the service does not conform to the ingredients required for classifyin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Shri S.J. Sahu, learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. From the orders of both the lower authorities, we find that the department has classified the services of the appellant under clause (iv) of Section 65 (19) of the Finance Act, 1994 on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellant is nowhere concerned with the procurement of goods, which was undertaken by their clients only and not by them. In these facts, we are of the clear view that the appellants have not provided any services in particular procurement of goods which is inputs for their clients. Therefore, the demand was wrongly confirmed under the said head and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). As per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
