2009 (3) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Hyderabad. 2. We heard both the sides in the matter. 3. The revenue proceeded against the appellants for payment of service tax under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Services' for the period from 1-7-2003 to 30-6-2004. The appellants entered into an agreement with M/s. United Breweries Ltd. appointing them as 'Del Credere'. In terms of the agreement, the appellants are required to render the following services as shown in the agreement:- "1.The Del Credere is in possession of a valid licence to operate as the Del Credere in the Territories for the brands of beer belonging to the company (hereinafter referred to as the "goods") or such other new brands to be specified by the company in writing from time to time for a period of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for scheme claim to the Company, before the 5th of every succeeding month. 7. The Del Credere shall assist the company in ensuring proper visibility/merchandising of the company's brands in the entire Territory, ensure loading and unloading of the goods at the places, maintain and report district wise sales figures for company's and competitors brands and monitor progress on a month-to-month basis. The Del Credere is completely responsible for all the promotional assets placed in the market by the company like visi coolers, Eutectic coolers placed in the wholesale points inclusive of glow sign boards. The Del Credere will also ensure smooth flow of business at the depots of Andhra Pradesh Beverages Corporation (APBC) in the Territories t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ication No.13/2003-ST, dated 20-6-2003 during the relevant period. The above notification exempts commission agents from payment of service tax. The contention of the appellants was not accepted. The lower authority confirmed the demands. He demanded interest and imposed penalties under sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant was aggrieved over the order of the Original authority. Therefore, they went in appeals to the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the order of the lower authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appellants could not be considered as commission agents and, therefore, the benefit of Notification No.13/2003-ST. dated 20-6-2003 would not be available to them. He ....