TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 638
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owned vehicles through their True Value Division. Alleging that the profit earned by the appellant on purchase and sale of used cars, is a consideration towards the Business Auxiliary Service rendered by the appellants, Revenue issued three show-cause notices to the appellants covering the periods 1.10.2006 to 30.9.2011; 1.10.2006 to 30.9.2011 and 1.4.2007 to 31.08.2012 in respect of their Kochi, Kottayam and Thiruvananthapuram units, respectively. The show-causes notices were confirmed by different Order-in-Original and appeals numbers ST/20449/2014; ST/20450/2014; and ST/22328/2014. Department also alleged that the incentives and discounts received by the appellants from M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (M/s. MSIL) also attract levy of servi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that sale or purchase of goods is specifically excluded from the definition of service under Section 65B(44) and therefore, no service tax can be levied on the profit margin earned by the appellants. He submits that the issue is squarely covered in the appellant's favour by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sai Service Station Ltd. vs. CCE: 2015 (37) STR 516 (Tri-Bang.) which was affirmed by the High Court of Kerala as reported in 2017 (7) GSTL 17 (Kerala). Learned counsel also submits that the impugned order has taken incorrect figures inasmuch as figures applicable for Appeal ST/20449/2014 were also taken for adjudicating the case which is under appeal in ST/20450/2014; even when the same was specifically brought out, learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....counsel also relies upon Toyota Lakozy Auto Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST and CE : 2017 (52) STR 299 (Tri.-Mum.). 4. Learned AR for the Department reiterates the findings of the respective Orders-in-Original. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 6. Coming to the issue of taxability of profit earned by the appellants on sale/purchase of used cars, we find that the issue is already settled in favour of the appellants in the case of Sai Service Station (supra). We find that the Tribunal has held as follows: "6............ "15. It is quite surprising and shocking to note that the lower Court had noticed that Ext. B5 cannot be accepted because it is not registered and sufficiently stamped as required under the Registration Act and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Trial Court was not justified in discarding Ext. 85 for the reason mentioned by it." 7. As can be seen, the observations are very clear and for considering a transaction as to whether it is a sale or not, what is required to be seen is not the aspect of registration but whether the price has been received and the property has been delivered or not. In this case, as observed by the Commissioner himself in paragraph 55, the property is delivered and the price has been received by the seller of the old car. Therefore, the first transaction cannot be considered as the one which is not a sale. There is no doubt as to the second transaction whether it is a sale or not. Once the first transaction is considered as sale, it means that the vehicle....