2017 (4) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Appellant Sri A.Roy, Suptd.(AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per: Shri Devender Singh 1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a Customs House Agent. For the period April, 2006 to March, 2007 on scrutiny of their ST-3 Returns it was revealed that the appellant had realized an amount of Rs. 17,10,128/- from their customers as total value against service provided. However, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Rolex Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore [2009(13) S.T.R. 147 (Tri.-Bang.)]. He also pleaded that extended period was not applicable as they had bonafide belief that tax was payable on remuneration received by them. 3. Ld. AR reiterated the findings in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and submitted that gross value needs to be taken into account under Sectio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the clients are not allowed to be deducted or excluded except in the case of pure agent. Admittedly, appellants are no pure agents and Commissioner (Appeals) has also given finding that appellants did not claim themselves to be a pure agent nor did they produce any evidence for fulfillment of conditions necessary for being a pure agent. In the case of Rolex Logistics Pvt. Ltd.(supra) relied upon b....