9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... THAT:- The very classification of renting of the above under renting of immovable property service is a misnomer and the consequent demand, therefore, can never be justified. Hence, this part of the demand as well as the impugned order set aside. Appeal allowed. - MR. P. DINESHA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. M. AJIT KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Ravindran V., Consultant for the Appellant Shri N. Satyanarayanan, Assistant Commissioner for the Respondent ORDER It is the case of the Revenue, as could be noticed from the impugned Order-in-Appeal as well as the Order-in-Original, that the assessee, a Co-operative Society, is conducting auction of various commodities for which they receive consideration labelled as commission/service charges. Further, the assessee also provided space for storage of goods and provided post-auction services including collection/distribution of auctioned price. The subsidiary regulations framed under their bylaws, allowed them to provide auction services for a consideration of money. Thus, the said services were covered under auctioneer s service as defined under Sections 65(7a) and 65(105)(zzzr) of the Finance Act, 1994, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces that were being sold by way of auction. For the above activities, the assessee-society collected a fixed percentage of commission on the quantum of sale or purchase of the agricultural produces. Their role was that of commission agent only, which, at the most, could fall under business auxiliary services which is exempted from Service Tax net as per Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. dated 20.06.2003, as amended. The godown charges which are classified under the category of storage and warehousing services , wherein also the benefit of exemption was available, whereas the same has been wrongly classified under renting of immovable property services . There is also absolutely no justification in treating the jewel loan appraising charges under business support services. 5.2 He would also rely on the following orders of this very Chennai Bench of the tribunal wherein a more or less identical issue has been considered and the appeals have been allowed in favour of the taxpayer: - i. The Salem Starch and Sago Industrial Coop. Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex. S.T., Salem [2019 (22) G.S.T.L. 250 (Tri. Chennai)] ii. The Salem Starch and Sago Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oop. Marketing Society (supra), this Bench has observed as under: - 5.1 The main issue which requires consideration in the instant case is as to whether the appellants are rendering Auctioneer s Service in respect of marketing and other services rendered for selling agricultural produce of its farmer members? The other issues are demand of service tax under BSS and GTA services. Regarding the taxability of appellant s services under Auctioneer s Service , a numerous judicial decisions have already gone into the differences between Auction and Tender. The Tribunal in M/s. The Salem Starch Sago Manufacturers Service Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. CCE ST, Salem reported in 2018 (3) TMI 192-Cestat Chennai, has analysed the differences between auction and tender as under:- Further, Learned Advocate has drawn our attention to the Tribunal s Final Order No. 40978/2019 dated 30.07.2019 rendered in respect of M/s. Attur Agricultural Producers Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. Vs. CCE, Salem, wherein it has been held as under:- 10. We have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records. As far as Auctioneers‟ Service is concerned, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered and decided in favour of the taxpayer. Nothing is brought on record before us by the Revenue as to any appeals filed or any stay orders by higher courts against the above orders of the co-ordinate Benches. Hence, we hold that the demands confirmed in the impugned Order-in-Appeal to the above extent deserve to be set aside, which we hereby do. 9.1 Insofar as item (3) i.e., renting of immovable property service, is concerned, we find from the records placed before us that the same is collected for the storage of copra an agricultural produce, which is brought by the producers and kept with the appellant-society until the same are sold. For this, the society collects storage charges from such agriculturists and the same cannot partake the character of rent since: (i) minimum charge of Rs.2.50/- per 100 kgs. is collected as storage charges, (ii) the produce that is stored is an agricultural produce which is exempted specifically under Section 65(102) and (iii) such amounts collected towards storage were very much below the threshold limit, to be treated even as storage and warehousing charges. The threshold limits for Service Tax under the above category, as applicable at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
