9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice and liable to pay service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Services . HELD THAT:- Tribunal in identical cases have already held that the said incentives are in no way a consideration for providing any service and cannot be liable for service tax under 'Business Auxiliary service'. See M/s SK Cars (India) Ltd. [ 2023 (6) TMI 243 - CESTAT CHENNAI] , M/s Audi Motors Pvt. Ltd. [ 2023 (4) TMI 1369 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] M/s Jubilant Motor Works (South) Pvt. Ltd. [ 2024 (2) TMI 819 - CESTAT CHENNAI] We find that the issue is no more res integra, since the issue is squarely covered by the decisions of the Tribunal and the activity cannot be considered as a service provided by the appellant to M/s MSIL. We do not find any reaso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Appeal No. 874/2012 before the Tribunal. 3. Thereafter, demand for the subsequent period from 01.04.2011 to 30.09.2011 was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. Aggrieved by said order, appeal was filed, and Appellate Authority vide impugned order dated 25.02.2016 held that; the discounts received by the appellant from M/s. MSIL are trade discounts, when certain volume of sale is achieved, the appellant buys vehicles from M/s. MSIL and sell them to customers. In these transactions, M/s MSIL and the Appellant operate on a principal-to principal basis, the discount is given to the Appellant in their role as a customer of M/s. MSIL and not as an agent of M/s. MSIL. Further, these discounts are made operative by discounting the value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r submitted that the promotion of sale of the product is in the interest of the appellant and it cannot be held that they have received commission from MSIL to promote Appellant s own sale. Further all the actions for promoting sale are for promotion of sale of their own dealership and product. Thus, the incentives cannot be considered as commission as held by the Adjudicating Authority. 6. Learned Counsel further submitted that the issue is no more res integra as various Benches of the Tribunal in identical cases have already held that the said incentives are in no way a consideration for providing any service and cannot be liable for service tax under 'Business Auxiliary service'. The Learned Counsel also relied on the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry management, evaluation or development of prospective customer or vendor, public relation services, management or supervision. and includes services as commission agent, but does not include any activity that amounts to manufacture of excisable goods. 8. The Learned AR submits that it is evident that the activities of the appellant amounts to service and liable to pay service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Services 9. Heard both sides, considered their submissions. We find that the issue is no more res integra, since the issue is squarely covered by the decisions of the Tribunal and the activity cannot be considered as a service provided by the appellant to M/s MSIL. 10. Further, we do not find any reason to differ with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
