Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the mark-up received by the appellant on the difference between freight charges collected from customers and freight charges paid to shipping liners is liable to service tax.
Analysis: The dispute concerned the taxability of the profit element arising from freight mark-up collected by the appellant. The Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate Bench decision in the appellant's own case for the preceding period, which had held that the extra amount collected over actual freight charges had nothing to do with the taxable service and could not be added to the value of the service for levy purposes. The Tribunal also noted that the cited precedents had not been stayed, set aside, or modified by any higher forum, and therefore applied judicial discipline, comity, and consistency to follow the earlier view. On that basis, the demand, together with the connected issues of interest and penalty, could not survive.
Conclusion: The freight mark-up was held not liable to service tax, and the impugned order was set aside in favour of the appellant.