Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Appeal allowed: Detention container charges not subject to service tax under Circular No. 121/2/2010-S.T.</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order-in-original, ruling that detention container charges were not subject to service tax as per ... Levy of service tax - container detention charges - whether the “container detention charges” is subject to service tax or not? - Circular No. 121/2/2010-S.T., dated 26-4-2010 - Held that: - Circular No. 121/2/2010-S.T., dated 26-4-2010 states that To retain the container beyond the pre-holding period is neither a service provided on behalf of the client (Business Auxiliary Service) nor is it an infrastructural support in the business of either the shipping lines or the customer (Business Support Service). Such charges can at best be called as ‘penal rent’ for retaining the containers beyond the pre-determined period - the amount collected as ‘detention charges’ is not chargeable to service tax - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:Whether container detention charges are subject to service tax or not.Analysis:The appeal was filed against an order-in-original passed by the Commissioner, Service Tax, New Delhi. The appellant company provided containers for cargo handling to clients and levied 'detention container charges' when the containers were not returned on time. The main issue was whether these detention charges were subject to service tax. The Circular No. 121/2/2010-S.T. clarified that retaining containers beyond the pre-holding period did not fall under Business Support Service or Business Auxiliary Service. The charges were considered as 'penal rent' and not chargeable to service tax. The Tribunal found that the issue was covered by the circular in favor of the assessee and allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order. The judgment was delivered by Justice Satish Chandra, President of the Tribunal.