2017 (3) TMI 117
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the appellant. Rep. by Ms. Neha Garg, DR for the respondent. Per B. Ravichandran: The appeal is against order dated 30.09.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Meerut. The appellant is an authorized dealer of motor vehicles for TVS Motor Company. The dispute in the present case relates to their tax liability on incomes under the category of "Publicity Expenses" and "Target Incen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g "Depot Operation Receipts", Ide Counsel submits that as per the declared policy of the manufacturer, made known to all the dealers through circulars, specific targets were fixed for sale of motor cycles. On exceeding the said target, monitory incentive eligible is also pre-notified. It is the case of the appellant that the incentive is relatable to the sale of goods and they have also benefitted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the appellant cannot be subjected to service tax under "BAS". 6. Regarding the tax liability for the consideration received as "Depot Expenses", it is clear that the same were paid by the manufacturer in pursuance of the declared policy for achieving the target in sales. The Tribunal on many earlier occasions examined similar set of facts with reference to sale of motor vehicles and receipt o....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI