9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 627X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice'. Further, the appellant, in the present case, had not supported the business of the buyers in any manner and arrangement of transportation was just to facilitate delivery of the duty paid excisable goods at the buyer's premises. Thus, the activities undertaken by the appellant, in our considered view, do not confirm to the definition of taxable service, for the purpose of levy of Service Tax thereon. It is noticed that no specific case of the service being provided under the head of business support service has been made out. As observed in Order In Original there is no contract for provision of the business support service between GTPL and their buyers. Even the notice does not show that GTPL were engaged in other than simply organizing transportation of goods. Relying on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Pushpak Steel Industry Private Limited, there are no merit in the appeal filed by revenue. Appeal allowed. - HON'BLE MR. RAMESH NAIR , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON'BLE MR. RAJU , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) For the Appellant : Shri Amal Dave , Advocate Present For the Respondent : Shri Rajesh Nathan , Assistant Commissioner ( AR ) ORDER RAJU Appeals have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of appeal Reliance has been placed on decision of Tribunal in the case of Canara Motors 2011 (121) STR 407. It was argued that in the said case transportation and delivery of vehicle done from factory to sales office was held to be covered under the service of business support service as Managing Distribution and Logistic . Revenue has in the grounds of appeals argued that the GTPL had arranged transportation of the sold excisable goods by engaging individual truck owners and managed transportation of said goods up to the buyers premises by managing distribution and logistic activities and they have neither issued any consignment note nor any lorry receipt. 5. It has been argued that the GTPL had taken profit of approximately 23% on the amount charged to buyers for the purpose of transportation. Revenue has also contested the view of Commissioner (Appeal) that the amount collected over and above the actual transport is recovery of additional consideration and therefore, includable in the value of excisable goods sold under Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Revenue has relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Indian Sugar and General Engineering Corporation 2016 (333) E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... category on the actual freight paid to the transporters and submitted that excess amount charged over and above the actual freight on which service tax under GTA category is discharged. is not for providing cry services but is in fact towards reimbursement of various expenses incurred on account of time, effort and manpower engaged for arranging such transportation. In view of the above it can be said that the services provided were not of the logistics in nature and cannot be classified under Buisness Support Services. I fully agree with the assessee's contention that they have not provided any logistics since their is no management of distribution regarding sale of goods rather it is only in relation to managing transport on the assessee's request for which even they are not issuing any lorry receipt or other documents. They are only managing the transporter and charging somewhat additional amount which they are showing in their balance sheet as profit. In this connection case of Bax Global India Ltd. reported in 2008 (9) STR 412 may be relied where following the principle laid down in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Baroda Electric meters it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivities related to that. We have perused the details of the billing for their entire period under dispute. It is broadly categorized in the following way. The charges are relating to : - (1) Air exports (2) Air imports (3) Ocean exports (4) Ocean imports (5) Customs clearance (6) Logistic. For example, in respect of Air exports, for the year 2000-2001 the Freight revenue is of the order of 8,8 crores. That means, this amount represents the freight collected by the appellants towards air freight for the customers and then paid to the airliners. This amount has also been sought to be taxed under the Customs House Agent activity. This shows the adjudicating authority has not applied his mind to the details of the various activities undertaken by the appellants and how they relate to the amount collected by them. In respect of air exports apart from freight, they collected various other charges ie. Cartage revenue, MSIL/JWG charges, due carrier, documentation etc. In all these cases the services are rendered by the third party and the appellants initially make payment for the activities on behalf of the client and later collect the amount from the clients. These are actually reimbursab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present case, the appellants collect air freight for export from the clients, but before collection he pays from his pocket to the Airliner. Thus this activity relates to transportation from a port in India or from a place in India to any other place in a foreign country. These freight charges cannot be said to be related to the activity of the CHA. In any case, the air freight fee is for a passage beyond India. This service is also not rendered by the CHA. The freight charges collected is for the transportation of the goods and the transportation service is rendered actually by the Airliner and not the CHA. These points have not been properly gone through by the adjudicating authority. Similarly if we see the breakup of other services, they do not relate to CHA activity at all. Further we find that storage and handling charges came into the service tax net only with effect from 16-8-2002. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that there is no merit in the impugned order. Moreover as contended by the learned Advocate, the major amount portion of the Billing represents freight charges and the Commissioner (Appeals) had already decided the issue in favour of the appellants. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
