9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ufacturing, therefore, they are entitled to avail credit on these services - credit allowed. Business Auxiliary services - commission recovered from insurance companies and banks - period October, 2003 to March, 2008 - Held that:- Similar issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Ashok Auto Sales Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 965 - ITAT AGRA], wherein the assessee was engaged in the same activity of providing table space, carrying out minimal paper work etc. for the banks and for the same, consideration was received from the bank. In the said case, this Tribunal held that the assessee was not providing Business Auxiliary services to the bank and hence, no service tax is leviable. The service tax cannot be demanded from the appellant on the value of spare parts/consumables utilized during the course of provision of services in the capacity of Authorized Service Station. Business Auxiliary services - Held that:- In the present case, the appellant is acting on principal to principal basis and appellant buys vehicle from M/s.TKML subsequently sale them in the market, therefore, the appellant is getting incentive on account of discounts for excess sale effected by the appellant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) Demand of service tax along with interest on the commission received as insurance pay out from insurance companies and banks during the period from October, 2003 to March, 2008 under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. (ii) Demand of service tax along with interest on the commission received as bank pay out from banking companies and banks during the period October, 2003 to March, 2008 Business Auxiliary Service. (iii) Demand of service tax on the amount received by the appellant against the warranty charges received by the appellant from M/s.TKML on behalf whom the appellant is providing customer care services. (iv) Demand service tax along with interest on the value of amount payable towards the value of spare parts/consumables utilized during the course of provision of services in the capacity of Authorized Service Station. (v) Demand of service tax on the incentive received by the appellant from M/s.TKML for excess sale of vehicles under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. 7. All issues are dealt with by us separately as under:- Denial of Cenvat credit on various services (a) The credit sought to be denied on the above service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, the demand cannot be confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation. It is a fact on record that for the period October, 2003 to March, 2008, the show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 30.3.2008, therefore, the said demand is barred by limitation. (ii) The demand sought to be confirmed on account of commission as insurance pay out from insurance companies and banks during the period October, 2003 to March, 2008 under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. 8. We find that it is the contention of the appellant that the appellant has not provided any service in the nature of Business Auxiliary Service to the banks and the appellant did not have agreement with the bank to act as their agents and they are only carrying out an executory function such as to collect forms from the customers, who wanted purchase the vehicles on loan, forward it to the bank and to get the papers signed from the customers and for these activities some amount was paid by the banks to the appellant. The appellant is not doing any promotion or marketing service on behalf of the said banks. Similar issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Ashok Auto Sales Ltd. and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the services rendered by the appellant on account of warranty charges is not sustainable against the appellant. (iv) The demand of service tax sought to be confirmed on the value of amount payable towards the value of spare parts/consumables utilized during the course of provision of services in the capacity of Authorized Service Station. 16. We find that the said issue has been examined by Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of J.P.Transformers-2014 (36) STR 961 (All.), wherein the Hon ble High Court has observed as under:- 9. In the present case, it has been found as a matter of fact that the value of the goods and materials utilized for repair of the transformers is separately disclosed in the agreement and is separately mentioned in the invoices of the assessee. The assessee has paid excise duty or, as the case may be, value added tax on goods used in the repairing process. It was in this factual background, on which there is no dispute, that the Tribunal held that Service Tax could not be demanded on that component representing the value of the goods and materials used for carrying out repairs. The mere fact that the cost of the various items was shown for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
