TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether incentives/discounts received by an authorised motor vehicle dealer from the manufacturer for achieving sales targets are leviable to service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Service; (ii) Whether the cenvat credit claimed on various input services by the dealer is admissible.
Issue (i): Whether target-based incentives paid by the manufacturer to the dealer constitute taxable consideration for Business Auxiliary Service.
Analysis: Relevant legal framework includes the definition of taxable consideration and the negative list regime under Section 66D of the Finance Act, 1994. Precedent decisions examining dealership agreements where transactions operate on a principal-to-principal basis have held that target incentives are trade discounts forming part of the sale price, not payments for specific services. Authorities analysing incentives have applied the principle that consideration for service must be attributable to a specific supply and that overall performance-based incentives are not transaction specific.
Conclusion: Incentives/discounts received by the dealer for achieving sales targets are trade discounts forming part of the sale transaction and are not leviable to service tax under Business Auxiliary Service. This issue is decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the cenvat credit claimed on various input services is admissible.
Analysis: The claim is supported by input invoices and related documents submitted with the appeal. The adjudicating authority had denied credit alleging absence of supporting documents at the adjudication stage. The admissibility requires verification of the submitted invoices and documents by the field formation against statutory requirements for input tax credit.
Conclusion: The question of admissibility of the claimed cenvat credit is remitted for verification of the submitted input invoices and documents and for decision on admissibility. This issue is not decided in favour of either party at this stage and is remanded for fresh adjudication.
Final Conclusion: The confirmed demands of service tax, education cess and secondary and higher education cess on incentives/discounts are set aside; the demands relating to cenvat credit are set aside and remitted to the adjudicating authority for verification and fresh decision on admissibility.
Ratio Decidendi: Target-based incentives paid by a manufacturer to an authorised dealer operating on a principal-to-principal basis are trade discounts forming part of the sale price and, being non-transaction-specific, do not constitute consideration for a taxable service under Section 66D of the Finance Act, 1994.
TaxTMI 
