Commission-agent order procurement qualified for exemption, as incidental promotion did not change the service classification.

Commission-agent activity focused on procuring orders and earning commission was treated as the dominant function, while promotional acts were regarded as incidental to that arrangement. On that basis, the service was not accepted in the Revenue's proposed business auxiliary services classification, and the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. was held applicable. The Revenue's challenge therefore failed and the original order was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent's activity was classifiable as business auxiliary services and whether it was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. dated 20-6-2003.

Analysis: The respondent's activities were found to be principally those of a commission agent engaged in procuring orders and earning commission on the sale of products. The related promotional activities were treated as incidental to the commission-based arrangement and part of the marketing strategy. On that factual basis, the exemption benefit under the notification was held applicable.

Conclusion: The classification proposed by the Revenue was not accepted and the respondent was held entitled to the notification benefit.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge failed and the impugned order was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the dominant activity is commission-based procurement of orders and the promotional acts are incidental to that function, the service may fall outside the Revenue's proposed classification and the exemption notification may apply.

---