2019 (4) TMI 131

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... om their customers and remitted the same to their principal. However, they have not collected any mark up or retained any part of the charges collected from their customers. They have just passed on the same to their principals. While collecting the port handling charges or terminal handling charges, appellants have not rendered any such service under this category. It is in fact Kawasaki Liner Service who have rendered these services. The appellants having not provided any service of port handling or terminal handling service and having not collected any consideration in this regard, the demand of service tax under this category on the appellants cannot sustain. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No.ST/656/201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n behalf of the appellants, Ld. Counsel Shri J. Shankarraman appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that appellant as agents of M/s. Kawasaki Liner Service were providing services on behalf of Kawasaki to shippers / consignees. As part of such services, the appellants were collecting port handling charges and terminal handling charges and remitted the same to M/s.Kawasaki. The appellants have not provided port handling services or terminal handling services. Appellants have not retained any amount collected under this category. Therefore, they are not liable to pay any service tax on the same. Department has alleged that said activity falls under Customer Care Services provided on behalf of the client within the definition of Busin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the same to their principals. While collecting the port handling charges or terminal handling charges, appellants have not rendered any such service under this category. It is in fact Kawasaki Liner Service who have rendered these services. The appellants having not provided any service of port handling or terminal handling service and having not collected any consideration in this regard, we are of the considered view that the demand of service tax under this category on the appellants cannot sustain. 5. From the foregoing, we hold that the impugned order requires to be set aside which we hereby do. Appeal is allowed with consequential benefits, if any, as per law. (dictated and pronounced in court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Service .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X