9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 630X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the intermediary service, in that circumstance, the refund claim filed by the appellant cannot be denied by holding that the appellant is providing intermediary service - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. ST/61605/2018 - ORDER No. A/60311/2019 - Dated:- 21-2-2019 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) And Mr. Bijay Kumar,, Hon ble Member (Technical) For The Appellant (s) : Smt. Reena Khair, Advocate For The Respondent (s) : Shri Atul Handa, AR ORDER Per : Mr. Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order rejecting their refund claim. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g satisfied that the appellants have complied with the Notification No. 27/2012(NT) dated 18.06.2012. It was also held that all the conditions specified in rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, have been fulfilled and that the services provided by the appellants qualify as Export of Services. v) On review of the order, the Department was directed to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), on the ground that the appellants have provided Intermediary Services to its holding company situated abroad, and the refund has been wrongly sanctioned. The appellants had also filed cross-objection before the Commissioner (Appeals). vi) The Commissioner (Appeals), Gurugram allowed the appeal filed by the De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucation Guide, the buyer s agent is specifically excluded from the scope of intermediary services. She further submits that it has been held that for intermediary services, the transaction should involve two activities, between the Principal and Agent and between Principal and the Service Recipient. Since, there is no third party in the present case, to whom any service is being provided, the appellant cannot be held to be the intermediary service. To support of this relied on the decision of RE Universal Services India Pvt. Ltd. 2016 [42] STR 585 (AAR), RE GO Daddy India Web Services (P) Ltd., 2016 (46) STR 806 (AAR). She further relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. vs. Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... between the principal and the third party; and ii) The supply of his own service (agency service) to his principal, for which a fee or commission is usually charged. For the purpose of this rule, an intermediary in respect of goods (such as a commission agent i.e. buying or selling agent, or a stockbroker) is excluded by definition. Admittedly, the activity undertaken by the appellant has specifically excluded from the intermediary service, in that circumstance, the refund claim filed by the appellant cannot be denied by holding that the appellant is providing intermediary service. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the impugned order, the same is set-aside. The appeal is allow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
