AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1225
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... both the appeals is identical and there is a common impugned order, both the appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is providing taxable services viz. 'Steamer Agent, Storage and Warehousing and Cargo Handling Services' and had obtained Service Tax registration for these services. As it appeared from the records that the appellant had received an amount of Rs. 14,633/- as brokerage in connection with the promotion of business of other establishment during the period from April 2004 to December 2005. Since the appellant had paid no service tax on the amount received, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellant demanding service tax and education cess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....agent, for having opted to put the goods, entrusted by the shipper on the vessel owned by the said steamer line. A small part of the brokerage is earmarked for being passed on to the shipper, as a business incentive. He further submitted that the remuneration that the appellant is getting is merely a business incentive which is common in the trade in which the appellant is engaged in. he further submitted that the show-cause notice seeks to impose service tax twice under two different categories, in respect of one and the very same service. It is his further submission that any transaction of service can be taxed only once even if it appears to be fall under two or more categories. He further submitted that the appellant deals with the stea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax for the activity of booking space and selling the same to the client for air cargo goods has been decided by the Tribunal in the decisions cited by the ld. Counsel for the respondent. The Tribunal has held the issue in favour of the respondent. The relevant portion of the decision in the case of M/s. Continental Carriers (supra) is reproduced as under:- "5. We have heard both sides and perused the material available on record. We note that the tax liability on similar activities under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service' has already come up for consideration before the Tribunal in the above mentioned cases and the Tribunal in the case of DHL Logistics (P) Ltd. (supra) has observed that: "4.2. Demand has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on from the airline. The appellants are engaged in buying and selling of space in the airline and depending on the volume of the space bought by the appellant from the airlines they received the commission/incentive. The appellants are not buying and selling space on the airline on behalf of their client but on their own behalf. To consider the activity of buying and selling the taxable activity under the head of BAS, the same should be done on behalf of the client. Thus, if the appellants were selling the space on carrier from the airline directly to the exporters without themselves purchasing the space then it could have been considered as an activity involving promotion of sales. In the instant case the appellant are directly buying them....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Greenwich Meridian Logistic (1) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST, Mumbai 2016 (43) STR 215 (Tri-Mumbai) = 2016-TIOL-869-CESTAT-MUM. The Tribunal examined similar set of fact and held that the appellants often, even in the absence of shippers, contract for space or slots in vessels in anticipation of demand and as a distinct business activity. It is a transaction between principal to principal and the freight charges or consideration for space procured from shipping-lines. The surplus earned by the respondent arising out of purchase and sale of space and not by acting for client who has space or not on a vessel. It cannot be considered that the respondents are engaged in promoting or marketing the services of any "client"." 7. As the issue has al....