TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 516
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al relates to transactions in respect of the warehoused goods which were sold by the Appellants to traders, while the goods were in customs bonded warehouse. 4. The purchasers to whom the goods are sold while in the customs bonded warehouse, place purchase orders on the Appellants indicating therein the quantity and the price or rate at which the goods are agreed to be purchased. For effecting the imports of the goods, the Appellants incur various expenses towards service provided by various service providers to the Appellants such as expenses towards Banking and L/C (letter of credit) charges, wharfage, surveyor's fees, etc. The Appellants while raising the invoices on the purchasers, split the price mentioned in the purchaser orders and issue a separate debit note towards such expenses incurred by the Appellants. To take an illustrative transaction which is at Exhibit A to the Appeal, the Appellants imported a consignment of 286.415 M.Tons of 'Methyl Ethyl Ketone' in May 2008 and filed warehousing bill of entry no.243376 dated 29-5-2008. While the goods were in warehouse, the Appellants sold 16 M.tons out of the said goods to R.A.Nariman & Co P. Ltd who cleared the said 16 M.t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the present appeal. 8. On behalf of the Appellants, Ld. Counsel submits that the Commissioner erred in applying the larger period of limitation. It is submitted that the Director General of Central Excise (DGCEI) had in November 2009 called upon the Appellants to submit copies of their commercial invoices for the period October 2005 to September 2009 while investigating an inquiry to ascertain facts regarding discharge of Service tax payment initiated against the Appellants. Further in June 2010 the DGCEI also called upon the Appellant to submit Invoice details as well as details in respect of extra charges including charges recovered through debit notes as well as party wise ledger accounts and balance sheets for the period April 2005 to March 2010 in respect of the inquiry regarding service tax. All such documents were submitted to DGCEI who after examining the same, by letter dated 31-8-2010 informed the Appellants that the Additional Director General had ordered closure of the inquiries and the Appellants were accordingly requested to collect from the office of the DGCEI all the records and documents submitted for the inquiry. It is contended that having examined the docu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and there was no agency and the various service providers like the Bank and Port had rendered the services to the Appellants as principals and not as agents for and on behalf of the buyers. It was further submitted that assuming while denying that the Appellants had rendered any service, the debit notes were towards reimbursement of expenses incurred by the Appellants and as held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats P. Ltd v UOI - 2013 (29) STR 9 service tax cannot be levied on expenses incurred by the service provider. 9. On the other hand it is submitted by Ld. A.R. on behalf of the department, that although the show cause notice was issued on 18-4-2013 it is for the period which is within five years i.e. October 2007 to January 2012 and hence the notice is not barred by time. It is submitted that merely because after holding the inquiry in 2009-10 the DGCEI ordered closure of the same and returned the documents to the Appellants, it would not mean that the DGCEI could not have issued the Notice in 2013 invoking the larger period of limitation. It is further submitted that merely because the Appellants records were audited t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ELT 276 and Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company v Collector of Central Excise- 1995 (78) ELT 401. In the present case the Appellants records have been subjected to scrutiny by the department from time to time. It is not in dispute that as many as four audits have been conducted by the department covering the period 1-10-2007 to 5-1-2012. Apart from such audits, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI) had in November 2009 called upon the Appellants to submit copies of their commercial invoices for the period October 2005 to September 2009 on an inquiry to ascertain facts regarding Service tax, was initiated against the Appellants. Further in June 2010 the DGCEI also called upon the Appellants to submit Invoice details as well as details in respect of extra charges including charges recovered through debit notes as well as party wise ledger accounts and balance sheets for the period April 2005 to March 2010 in respect of the inquiry regarding service tax. All such documents were submitted to DGCEI who after examining the same, by letter dated 31-8-2010 informed the Appellants that the Additional Director General had ordered closure of the inquiries and the Appellants....