2018 (7) TMI 1535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Limited. The Joint Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No. 24/2006 dated 25.01.2007 has confirmed the demand while charging interest and imposing penalties; the Commissioner (A) vide Order-in-Appeal No. 167/2008 dated 29.09.2008 has set aside the Order-in-Original in terms of the ratio of judgment of this Bench holding that reimbursement on account of various charges like loading/unloading, coolie, cartage, handling/portage and lorry freight charges, electricity, telephone, godown rent, salary to staff etc. are not leviable to Service Tax; that the Service Tax is only on commission and other reimbursed expenses cannot be added to commission. The Commissioner relied upon the following cases: (i) E.V. Mathai & Sons Vs. CCE Cochin, 20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (v) Maintaining records of the receipt and dispatch of goods and the stock available at the warehouse; (v) Preparing invoices on behalf of the principal. 2.1 The above mentioned operations are the 'services' provided by any Clearing and Forwarding agents to their clients. The amount paid by the principal in the manner of commission or by way of reimbursement by only the remunerations therefore, is chargeable to Service Tax. 3. The counsel for the respondents has relied upon the following decisions and stated that the amounts reimbursed are not chargeable to Service Tax: (i) Final Order No. 20664/2018 dated 20.04.2018 of CESTAT Bangalore. (ii) UOI Vs. Intercontinental Consultants - 2018-10-GSTL-401-SC (iii)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t be anything more or less than the consideration paid as quid pro qua for rendering such a service. (29.) The obvious basis of the principle against retrospectively is the principle of "fairness", which must be the basis of every legal rule as was observed in (Office Cherifien des Phosphates Vs. Yamashita- Shinnihon Stemship Co. Ltd). Thus, the legislations which modified accrued rights or which impose obligations or impose new duties or attach a new disability have to be treated as prospective unless the legislative intent is clearly to give the enactment a retrospective effect; unless the legislation is for purpose of supplying an obvious omission in a former legislation or to explain a former legislation. We need not note the c....