9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emand as well as appropriated an amount of Rs.7,88,343/- paid against the total interest demanded on the aforementioned confirmed demand. The adjudicating authority had further imposed a penalty of Rs.31,74,186/- under Section 78 of the Act. The OIO that was upheld by the appellate authority, also confirmed a demand of service tax on renting of immovable properties which the appellant has conceded that they are not contesting before this Tribunal and which demand along with applicable interest has been paid by the appellant and appropriated in the impugned OIO. 2. Brief facts, relevant to the dispute under consideration, are that the appellant is registered with the service tax department for providing Customs House Agent service (CHA service in short). During the course of audit conducted by the Internal Audit Party it was noticed that the Appellant apart from collecting service charges for providing CHA service, also incurred certain expenditure towards various charges such as loading, unloading of containers, documentation charges, container stuffing, destuffing, customs examination charges etc. However, the appellant has not included the aforementioned charges collected in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies. Consequent to the reply filed by the appellant, a personal hearing was granted, subsequent to which the adjudicating authority issued the impugned order in original No.166/2012 dated 21.08.2012 rendering a finding that the said reimbursable expenses cannot be excluded from the gross amount and consequently the appellant is liable to pay service tax along with interest on such reimbursable expenses reimbursed by their clients. Accordingly, the demand proposed in the show cause notice was confirmed along with demand of appropriate interest and imposition of penalties under Section 78 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said impugned order in original the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals-I), who however, vide the impugned OIA 107/2015 (STA-I) dated 20.04.2015, upheld the impugned OIO of the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved by the aforementioned finding, the appellant has preferred the present appeal assailing the impugned OIA and is thus before this Tribunal. 5. The learned counsel, Shri. S. Murugappan, appeared and argued for the appellant. The learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in the business of providing service as a CHA an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f appellant's records and hence no basis to invoke the proviso to section 73(1) has been made out. Reliance was placed on the decision of this Tribunal in International Clearing & Shipping agency reported in (2024) 15 Centax 357 (Tri-Mad). 7. Learned Authorized Representative, Shri. Harendra Singh Pal appeared for the Department and reiterated the findings in the impugned order in appeal. 8. We have heard both sides, perused the appeal records and the case law cited by the appellant. 9. We find that the issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of UOI v Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt Ltd, [2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC)] which has considered the issue of liability to pay service tax on reimbursable expenses received by the service provider in the course of rendering services for the client, apart from the consideration received for rendering the services on which the client has discharged the liability to pay service tax. The Honourable Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Delhi High Court in Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats Pvt Ltd v UOI, 2013 (29) STR 9 (Del), wherein Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated for providing such 'taxable service'. That according to us is the plain meaning which is to be attached to Section 67 (unamended, i.e., prior to May 1, 2006) or after its amendment, with effect from, May 1, 2006. Once this interpretation is to be given to Section 67, it hardly needs to be emphasised that Rule 5 of the Rules went much beyond the mandate of Section 67. We, therefore, find that High Court was right in interpreting Sections 66 and 67 to say that in the valuation of taxable service, the value of taxable service shall be the gross amount charged by the service provider 'for such service' and the valuation of tax service cannot be anything more or less than the consideration paid as quid pro qua for rendering such a service. 25. This position did not change even in the amended Section 67 which was inserted on May 1, 2006. Sub-section (4) of Section 67 empowers the rule making authority to lay down the manner in which value of taxable service is to be determined. However, Section 67(4) is expressly made subject to the provisions of sub-section (1). Mandate of sub-section (1) of Section 67 is manifest, as noted above, viz., the service tax is to be paid only on the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... legislation, be it a statutory Act or a statutory rule or a statutory notification, may physically consists of words printed on papers. However, conceptually it is a great deal more than an ordinary prose. There is a special peculiarity in the mode of verbal communication by a legislation. A legislation is not just a series of statements, such as one finds in a work of fiction/non-fiction or even in a judgment of a court of law. There is a technique required to draft a legislation as well as to understand a legislation. Former technique is known as legislative drafting and latter one is to be found in the various principles of "interpretation of statutes". Vis-a-vis ordinary prose, a legislation differs in its provenance, layout and features as also in the implication as to its meaning that arise by presumptions as to the intent of the maker thereof. 28. Of the various rules guiding how a legislation has to be interpreted, one established rule is that unless a contrary intention appears, a legislation is presumed not to be intended to have a retrospective operation. The idea behind the rule is that a current law should govern current activities. Law passed today cannot apply to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
