2023 (11) TMI 611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the situation is revenue neutral. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Appellant is registered under the provisions of Service Tax and was engaged in providing 'Business Auxiliary Services' (BAS). The Appellant has jointly with 'M/s Kirtanlal Steel Export, Mumbai' (KSE) carried out sale and marketing of seamless steel pipes produced by 'M/s Mittal Steel, Romania' (MS) (Manufacturer - Principal) in the Indian market as per Memorandum of Understanding dated 24.12.2005 signed between the parties and have earned a commission of Rs.79,77,026/- for such services rendered between the period 01.01.2006 to 31.03.2006 and for which the Appellant has charged 50% of total commission received from M/s MS in terms of MoU between the Appellant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant entered into Joint Venture agreement with M/s KSE for the purpose of providing BAS, to M/s MS of Romania. The service provided by the Appellant i.e., marketing of the goods to M/s MS, in Joint Venture with M/s KSE, is directly received by M/s MS of Romania. It does not make any material difference on the fact that M/s MS paid remuneration first to M/s KSE in India and M/s KSE, thereafter, shared 50% of such commission earned on the business achieved through this Appellant. The very essence of the Joint Venture agreement is that, service recipient is M/s MS of Romania. Accordingly, the Appellant, although disclosed the turnover for such services in their returns, they claimed the same as service exempt, being export of service. Admit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m for export of service, which is not disputed by the Department. Accordingly, the extended period of limitation is not available on the ground of revenue neutrality also. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the Appeal with consequential benefits. 6. Further, he relies on the following rulings: a) CC, CE & ST vs Monsanto Manufacturer Pvt Ltd [2014 (35) STR 177 (All.)] b) Uniworth Textiles Ltd vs CCE, Raipur [2013 (288) ELT 161 (SC)] c) Aditya College of Competitive Exam vs CCE, Visakhapatnam [2009 (16) STR 154 (Tri-Bang)] d) Mega Trends Advertising Ltd vs CCE & ST, Lucknow [2020 (38) GSTL 57 (Tri-All) e) Jai Balaji Industries Ltd vs CCGST & CX, Bolpur [2022 (58) GSTL 313 (Tri-Kol)] 7. Opposi....