Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2023 (4) TMI 1019

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd operate a Company owned and company operated (hereinafter referred to as "COCO") Motor Spirit/HSD retail outlet and recovered from them, in name of the provisions of Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 in the taxable value. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant is engaged in providing services to M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as "BPCL") to run and operate a Company owned and company operated (hereinafter referred to as "COCO") Motor Spirit/HSD retail outlet and received the amount on account of providing such services. It was alleged in the show cause no. 13422 dated 21.11.2012 notices that the said services are covered under the scope of "Business Auxiliary Service" classifiabl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder under challenge is alleged to have ignored the said settled position of law on the impugned issue. Accordingly, the impugned order is prayed to be set aside and the appeal prayed to be allowed. 6. Per contra, learned authorised representative appearing for the Department has relied upon the decision of CESTAT, New Delhi in the case of Harinder Goyal vs. CCE, Chandigarh [2015(12) TMI 1107 -CESTAT New Delhi, wherein the appeal of the assessee who was aggrieved of inclusion of reimbursable expenses in the taxable income was dismissed. However, learned authorised representative as conceded the decision as is relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant. 7. Having heard the rival contentions, we observe and hold as follows: ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ect from May 14, 2015, whereby Clause (a) which deals with 'consideration' is suitably amended to include reimbursable expenditure or cost incurred by the service provider and charged, in the course of providing or agreeing to provide a taxable service. Thus, only with effect from May 14, 2015, by virtue of provisions of Section 67 itself, such reimbursable expenditure or cost would also form part of valuation of taxable services for charging service tax. Though, it was not argued by the learned counsel for the Department that Section 67 is a declaratory provision, nor could it be argued so, as we find that this is a substantive change brought about with the amendment to Section 67 and, therefore, has to be prospective in nature." 8. Thi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lt to hold that the gross amount of remuneration/commission would nevertheless include expenditure incurred by the assessee providing the services; that all incidental charges for running of the business would also form part of the remuneration or Commission (by whatever name called). The phrase "by whatever name called" must necessarily have some link or reference or nature to the receipt of remuneration or commission. Thus, if a receipt is for reimbursing the expenditure incurred for the purpose, the mere act of reimbursement, per se, would not justify the contention of the Revenue that the same, having the character of the remuneration or commission, deserves to be included in the sum amount of remuneration/commission." 10. This Tribu....