TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 756
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Order-in-Appeal, are as under: - " The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant are the manufacturers of Whole Egg Powder, Egg Yolk Powder and Albumen Powder and export them to various countries. The appellant while receiving the export proceeds, had received lesser amount than what is due to them from the foreign banks. The amount deducted by such foreign banks being Bank Charges and for that amount, the appellant had not paid any Service Tax since the service would fall under "Banking and Other Financial Service" in terms of Section 66A of the Act and thus contravened the Section and Rule 2(1)(d) and 6 of Service Tax Rules, 1994. Hence a Show Cause Notice dated 11.2.2013 was issued demanding Service Tax of Rs.79,930/- with inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner of Service Tax Delhi [2019 (26) G.S.T.L. 104 (Tri. - Del.)] and M/s. Dileep Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [2017 (10) TMI 1231 - CESTAT, New Delhi], has held as under: - "5.1 The main issue involved in this case is whether the amount which was deducted by the Foreign bank towards the bank charges are taxable under the service "Banking and other Financial Service" for the period 2006-2007 to 2010- 2011? The other issues involved are whether invocation of extended period and imposition of penalties are sustainable in the facts of the case? 5.2 We find that the appellants have submitted the documents for realization of export sale proceeds to their bank namely SBI, which in turn has used the services o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reign banks. The foreign banks while remitting the money to the Indian Bank, deduct their charges for collection of bills which in turn are charged by the Indian Banks from the appellants. When it is so, then the appellant are not entitled to pay the service tax. The identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of Greenply Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur (Final Order No. 50149/2014 dated 03.01.2014) where it was observed that- "4. We find that no documents have been produced showing that foreign bank has charged any amount from the appellant directly. The facts as narrated in the impugned order clearly indicate that it is the ING Vyasa Bank who had paid the charges to the foreign bank. In view of this, the appellant cannot ....