Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (11) TMI 1107

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l. 2. Two appeals are filed by the assessee-Appellants against the confirmation of Service Tax liability under "Cargo Handing Services" for the period August 2002 to August 2004 and one appeal by the Revenue against the concession of re-quantification of tax liability on cum-tax value as ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee-Appellants are engaged in the activity of unitisation, strapping and packeting of finished goods manufactured by M/s BSP, Bhilai, in terms of the agreement with them. The Revenue entertained a view that the activities undertaken by the assessee-Appellants are liable to be taxed under the category of „Cargo Handling Services‟ in terms of Section 65(105) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the client's premises. Admittedly, the very same issue in the assessee-Appellants‟ own case was subject matter of the decision before the Apex Court (supra) wherein it was held that : "5. To appreciate the issues arising in the present case, Section 65(23) which defines "cargo handling service"; Section 65(105)(zr) which deals with the "taxable service rendered by a cargo handling agency"; Section 65 (76b) which defines "packaging activity" and Section 65(105)(zzzf) which makes "service rendered in connection with packaging activity" exigible to the service needs to be extracted below :- "Section 65-In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:- (23) "cargo handling service" means loading, unloading, packing or un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... period, on the basis that the appellant is engaged in "packaging activity" has not been disputed by the Revenue. 7. At this stage notice must also be had of the fact that there is no dispute on the fact that the liability sought to be fastened on the appellant is on account of the activity undertaken by the appellant in the manufacturing unit of the principal manufacturer, namely, Tata Refractories Limited. It is also not in dispute that such activity is prior to the goods leaving the factory gate and the charges paid to the appellant for rendering the service forms a part of the assessable value of the manufactured goods of the principal manufacturer, namely, Tata Refractories Limited. In such a situation, we will really have to discern .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ire a mention. In a Circular bearing F.No.B.11/1/2002-TRU dated 01.08.2002 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, services liable to tax under the category of "cargo handling services", has been clarified to mean services provided by cargo handling agencies which is, in effect what Section 105(zr) provides for. 12. Clause 3 of the circular is in the following terms: "3. The services which are liable to tax under this category are the services provided by cargo handling agencies who undertake the activity of packing, unpacking, loading and unloading of goods meant to be transported by any means of transportation namely truck, rail, ship or aircraft. Well known examples of cargo handling service or services provided in relat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble to pay service tax on the service rendered by it in terms of Section 65(23) read with Section 105(zr) of the Act. 16. The demand raised on the appellant may be understood in the aforesaid light and all reliefs as may be due in terms of the above be granted forthwith." 7. We note that earlier in the assessee-Appellants' own case, the matter reached the Hon'ble Supreme Court where the Court directed the President, CESTAT, to constitute a Larger Bench to resolve the difference between two contrary decisions of the Tribunal on this issue [ITW India Ltd. Vs Commissioner, 2016 (41) STR J49 (SC)]. Thereafter, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal heard the matter in the case of Shreem Coal Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur, Bhubaneswar- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates