Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (1) TMI 1063

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntral Excise vs. Cadilla Healthcare Ltd. reported in 2013(30) S.T.R. 3 (Guj) even though the appellant paid commission to the Stockiest/distributors on sales promotion activity? 2) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was correct in holding that Credit of Service Tax paid on commission amount paid to dealers/stockist is inadmissible to the appellant by overlooking the statutory provision of Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? 3) Whether the Tribunal was correct in discarding the agreement entered between the appellant and Distributors wherein it was specifically mentioned the nature of activities to be undertaken by the Stockiest/distributors and denied CENVAT credit on input services? 4) Whether the activitie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ght of the interpretation made by the jurisdictional High Court, it is held that activities undertaken by the distributors/consignment stockists of the appellant are purely distribution/sales and has no element of sales promotion and, therefore, CENVAT credit taken with respect to commission paid to such distributors/ consignment stockists is not admissible. The credit so taken is required to be paid by the appellant with interest and appeal with respect to CENVAT credit on services of Sales Commission, availed by the appellant is rejected." 4. Learned counsel Shri Modh for the appellant drawing our attention to the agreement executed between the parties and its agents contended that the agents were also involved in the sales promotion. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt for sale of final product. However, there is nothing to indicate that such commission agents were actually involved in any sales promotion activities as envisaged under the said expression. The term input service as defined in the rules means any service used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service or used by the manufacturer whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal and includes services used in relation to various activities of the description provided therein including advertisement or sales promotion. Thus, the portion of the definition of input service insofar as the same is relevant for the present purpose....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessees activity relating to business, it may be noted that the includes part of the definition of input service includes activities relating to the business, such as accounting, auditing, financing, recruitment and quality control, coaching and training, computer networking, credit rating, share registry, and security. The words activities relating to business are followed by the words such as. Therefore, the words such as must be given some meaning. In Royal Hatcheries (P) Ltd. v. State of A.P., 1994 Supp (1) SCC 429, the Supreme Court held that the words such as indicate that what are mentioned thereafter are only illustrative and not exhaustive. Thus, the activities that follow the words such as are illustrative of the activities ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ies mentioned in the definition, would not fall within the ambit of the expression activities relating to business. Consequently, CENVAT credit would not be admissible in respect of the commission paid to foreign agents. (x) For the reasons stated hereinabove, this court is unable to concur with the contrary view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Ambika Overseas (supra). Insofar as this issue is concerned, the question is answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee." 6. As noted above, the assessing authority as well as the Tribunal came to factual finding that there was no material on record to establish that the commission agents of the appellant GSFC had i....