TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 231
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... K Manjhi, Authorized Representative ORDER Per Bijay Kumar 1. This order seeks to assail the Order-in-Original No. JOD-EXCUS-000-COMM-002 dated 30.04.2015 (herein after refer to as impugned order). In the impugned order learned Commissioner has confirmed the demand raised against the appellant issued vide Show Cause Notice dated 02/12/2014. 2. The brief fact of the case is that the appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1,47,522/-. The Department scrutinised the declaration submitted by the appellant and came to the conclusion that the appellant has not correctly declared the 'tax dues' in terms of VCES to the extent that they have received commission from M/s Tulip Global Private Limited for which they are not entitled for the threshold exemption, in terms of Notification No. 06/205-ST dated 01/03/2005 as amend....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....present case is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Tribunal Delhi in case of M/s Charanjeet Singh Khanduja and Others. vs CST, Indore/ Lucknow/ Jaipur/ Ludhiana and others [2015 (6) TMI 585-Cestat New Delhi]. 4. In view of above it is submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable and liable to be set aside. 5. Learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue reiterate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not applicable when the taxable service is provided by a person under a brand name/trade name, whether registered or not, of another person and in this group of cases, the Distributors have promoted the sale/marketing of branded products. This plea of the Department is not correct, as in these cases the distributors are engaged in promoting sales/marketing of the products of Amway and they are not....