TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1439
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roviding service in respect of sale of insurance products for and on behalf of M/s. Maruthi finance to the buyers of vehicles from M/s. Maruthi Udyog Ltd. In both the activities, the appellant was receiving remuneration / commission from M/s. Maruthi Insurance Brokers Ltd. (MIBL) / M/s. Maruthi Udyog Ltd. As the above activities of the appellant appeared to fall under 'Business Auxiliary Service' (BAS) as defined in Clause 19 of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 and having found that no service tax had been paid, show-cause notices were issued to the appellant demanding service tax for the period 01/04/2005 to 31/09/2005 and 01/10/2005 to 31/03/2006 and also proposing penalties under the provisions of Finance Act, 1994. Show-cause notices....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was confirmed by the appellate Commissioner. He further submitted that the appeal was filed challenging the Order-in-Appeal No.63/2007 dt. 30/10/2007. The Order-in-Appeal is a common order covering Order-in-Appeal No.62 & 63 /2007 dt. 30/10/2007 and one of the order arising from the common OIA was subject matter of the decision reported as Popular Vehicles & Services Ltd. Vs. CCE [2010(18) STR 493 (Tri. Bang.)] and the decision was rendered in favour of the appellant. He further submitted that the order of the Tribunal was challenged by the Department before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and the said appeal was dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dt. 20/07/2018. He further submitted that in view of the inter-party judgmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he facts of the case and the submissions of both the sides, it appears that the matter is covered by the Tribunal's decisions in the cases of Ved Automotives vs. CCE, Kanpur: 2016 (44) S.T.R. 140 (Tri.- All.); CST, Mumbai vs. Jaybharat Automobiles Ltd.: 2016 (41) S.T.R. 311 (Tri.-Mum.); and TVS Motor Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Chennai: 2012 (28) S.T.R. 127 (Tri.-Chennai). 4.1 We find that the appellants have been receiving commission/remuneration from M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (MUL)/MIBL/MIANL for canvassing loans to buyers of vehicles and they are also engaged in issuing insurance policy of M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. on behalf of MIBL, which is a fully owned subsidiary of MUL. These facts are applicable to both the appellants. The appellants ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ives are passed on by the dealers to the customers, whether tax would be leviable only on that part of incentive, which is retained by the dealers or whether it would be on full amount?" This question/issue has been answered in para 4 of the Circular holding that service tax will be payable by the dealer on the gross amount received from the Financial Company. The answer given in para 4 is given below: "4. In some cases, the automobile dealers help the buyers of the vehicles for arranging the finances. For this, they have a tie-up with Banks / Non-banking Finance Companies. The customers are advised by the dealers to approach such financial companies for taking loans. The automobile dealers get commission from such financial com....