AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 241
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion. It is the case of the Revenue that appellant is a manufacturer of Grinding Media, had procured orders from their purchasers Associate Cement Companies (hereinafter referred to as ACC); forwarded the said order to their subsidiary company viz., Well Cast Steel Ltd (herein after referred to as WSL); the goods were delivered by WSL directly to ACC and raised the invoice in the name of the appellant denoting therein 4% CST and a discount amount for such sale. After investigation and recording of various statements, show cause notice was issued to appellant for demand of the service tax liability on such transactions, interest thereof and imposition of penalties. The appellant contested the show cause notice on merits as well as on limitat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ued by Vigilance & Enforcement Dept. of Andhra Pradesh, Value Added Tax, on the issue. It is his submission that vide circular dtd 7.5.2010 Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, had clarified that there is no specific condition in Section 6(2) of CST Act by which exemption can be disallowed in the case of transit sales on the ground that sales are made to pre-determined buyer. It is his submission that in the entire transaction the only thing that requires determination is whether the transfer of property in goods took place while the goods were in transit or not, for which he submits that in the given case it is so. He would submit that benefit of Section 6(2) of the CST Act cannot be denied for subsequent sale made to pre-dete....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tween appellant and WSL were in nature of sale and purchase. He would rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of JR Communications and Power Controls vs CCE - 2009(91) RLT 398 for the proposition that the discount given cannot be considered as exemption. It is his submission that without prejudice the submissions made earlier violation, if any, can be at the most a breach of provisions of CST Act, and may not have service tax angle and definitely not a service under Business Auxiliary Services. It is also his submission that the WSL had discharged Central Excise duty on the entire sale value of the goods to ACC on a price on which appellant has sold the goods, hence the same transaction cannot be taxed under Service Tax. 5. Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oices one from WSL to Aia Engg and another from AIA Engg. to ACC. It is his submission that payment of excise duty under Rule 9 of the Valuation Rules does not alter the status of the appellant as the commission agent. He would submit that the entire modus operandi was unearthed only after thorough investigation and claim of the appellant as to demand hit by limitation is incorrect. He would rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Surendra Singh Rathore vs CCE Jaipur 2014.34.STR.147 for the proposition that the Service Tax liability arises when there is promotion/marketing of products; which in the case in hand is very evident. 6. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused records. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....strued as a commission agent due to there being no movement of goods either real or contemplated from WSL to Aia and it is only a fiction created by the appellant in order to avoid discharge of service tax liability. 9. We do not agree with the findings recorded by the Adjudicating Authority for more than one reason. 9.1 Firstly, on perusal of the records, we find that at page No 105, WSL has procured Form E-1 as provided under Section 6(2) of CST Act for interstate sale and transfer of title to the appellant. The said form is reproduced at page No. 8. 9.1.1 We find at Page No 110 appellant has issued C-Form in the name of WSL for the same transaction. The said form is reproduced at page No. 9. 9.1.2 It can be seen from the abov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly, we find that the Adjudicating Authority has not correctly appreciated the positions of Section 6 of the CST Act in as much as, on perusal of said section, we note it provides interstate sales transactions effected by transfer of documents of title to such goods during the movement from one state to another. In the case in hand, the goods moved from Karnataka to Jharkhand the transfer of documents took place during such movement is not in dispute. 11. Thirdly, we find that the Adjudicating Authority has illustrated the transactions in Paragraph No 41 of the OIO. On perusal of such illustrative documents, we find that the WSL has raised the Excise duty paying invoice on which they have indicated discharge of CST @ 3% and invoiced the s....