2016 (12) TMI 855

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Advocate for the Appellant Shri B. Kumar Iyer, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran These two appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal Nos. P-I/MMD/141/2012 dated 27.07.2012 & PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-37-14-15 dated 04.06.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-I, wherein the first appellate authority has upheld the orders and confir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Counsel was correct in bringing to our notice, that in identical issue, in the case of Wonder Cars Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I  [2016 (42) STR 1055 (Tri.-Mumbai)] Tribunal Bench held as under. "This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. PI/RKS/73/2012, dated 21-3-2012. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with the customers, get covered under the category of Business Support Services and covered directly in relation to their main business of sales of cars. 5. We find that the findings recorded by the lower authorities are incorrect as the definition of Business Support Services as per Section 65(104c) of the Finance Act reads as under: "support services of business and commerce m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and security". It can be seen from the above reproduced definition that the said definition covers services which are rendered as indicated therein. In the case in hand, the amount collected as extra charges is not for any of the services which are enumerated in the said definition. The first appellate authority has stated that appellant is a rendering customer relationship services which....