9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remier Enterprises Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad [2009 (3) TMI 123 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], where it was held that Once they are held to be commission agents, they will be entitled for exemption under N/N. 13/2003-ST during the relevant period - benefit of notification allowed. Valuation - includibility - reimbursable expenses - Held that: - It is clear that the various expenditure which were claimed on actual basis to be reimbursed by M/s United Breweries Ltd. are in effect reimbursable expenditures which are incurred on behalf of the principal. These are in terms of pre-arrangement with the principal. It is clear such expenditure which are on behalf of the principal in accordance with agreement which are reimbursed on actu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant submitted that there are two issues involved for decision. The first one is with reference to availability of the exemption to the appellant under Notification No. 13/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003. The second one is with reference to valuation of taxable services after the withdrawal of the said notification. The ld. Counsel submitted that the appellant is covered by tax entry 'Business Auxiliary Service'. However, for the period during which Notification No. 13/2003-ST was in existence they are not liable to pay tax as they were essentially a 'commission agent' rendering 'Business Auxiliary Service'. Such services provided by a commission agent were exempted during the material time. 4. On the second issue, he submitted that in terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a type of split up by itself will not justify any exclusion from the taxable value in terms of Section 67 of the Act. The expenses for merchandisers are all with reference to promotion of sale of goods received from the principal. These are essential expenses to be included in the taxable value in terms of clear provisions under Rule 5 of the Service Tax Valuation Rules. There can be no exclusion from the gross value for tax purposes. Accordingly, he supported the findings of the lower authority. 7. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 8. On the first issue, we note that almost similar set of facts came up for consideration before the Tribunal in Premier Enterprises Vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 2009 (16) STR 158 (Tri.-Ban ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve documents available in the appeal papers. It is clear that the various expenditure which were claimed on actual basis to be reimbursed by M/s United Breweries Ltd. are in effect reimbursable expenditures which are incurred on behalf of the principal. These are in terms of pre-arrangement with the principal. It is clear such expenditure which are on behalf of the principal in accordance with agreement which are reimbursed on actual basis without any mark up are not to be included in the assessable value. In this connection, we also refer to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2013 (29) STR 9 (Del.) and the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
