TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 84
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Coimbatore who have upheld the Order in Original No. 03/2013 ST dated 03.06.2013 of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirupur Division, confirming the demand of Service Tax of Rs. Along with interest besides imposing penalties under Section 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. 1 Brief facts of the appeal are that the Appellants Viz., M/s. Original Knit Exports are engaged in the manufacture and export of hosiery garments. The Appellants have incurred expenditure towards bonus, recycling compensation and inspection charges at the buyers end and the same is shown in their export invoices/shipping bills but they have not discharged the Service Tax liability on the same. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appointed by the buyer M/s. Bon Prix Germany and were split into various heads at their convenience. Bonus of 5% which is an incentive given to the parent company Otto GmbH, by each of their subsidiaries, cover the cost of various business promotion activities. 1% packing recycling charges, shown in the invoice is the amount to be given to German Govt. Authorities, for handling the packing material waste, especially the polythene bags used for packing the garments. 1.5% inspection charges mentioned in the invoice is the amount charged by Bon Prix to cover the cost of deputing their quality control representatives to the market, from time to time to control the quality of products and also to impart training to the concerned Q C staff in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shion Force, Tirupur. The allegation in the Show Cause Notice does not bring out as to who is the service provider and the service receiver. It merely states that the deductions have been made by the Appellant in the invoice in the nature of inspection charges and recycling compensation. These amounts cannot be considered as consideration for service provided by the foreign entity M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai to the Appellant. The Appellant is selling the goods to M/s. Bon Prix in Germany offering deductions in the nature of discounts during the sale. The discounts shown in the invoice cannot be equated with commission paid. The discounts are nothing but part of sale transactions and there is no service provided / received. The transaction betwe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the cases of Veer Prabhu Marketing Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jodhpur [2023 (73) GSTL 222 (Tri.-- Del.)], Madras Security Printers Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai [2023 (4) TMI 1195--CESTAT--Ahmedabad] and Texyard International Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy [2015 (40) STR 322 (Tri.--Chennai)] and also on the Order--in--Appeal No. 196/2012 dated 24.09.2012 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) contending that the services received for export of their finished goods cannot be subject to Service Tax. 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative Shri Harendra Singh Pal appeared and argued for the Department. He has reiterated the findings of the impugned order No. 359/2013 dated 31.10.2013. He ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ay Service Tax under "Business Auxiliary Service" & "Technical Inspection and Certification" or not? 7. The contention of the Appellant is that certain deductions shown in the invoices raised to M/s. Bon Prix, Germany, are only discounts in a transaction of sale. M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai arranges for procuring the goods from the appellant to M/s. Bon Prix, Germany. M/s. JPS Trading conducts quality test for export of the garments through their agent viz., Fashion Force, Tirupur situated in India. It is thus assumed by the Department that the deductions made in the invoice price is towards payment of commission and for furtherance of business of the appellant rendered by M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai through M/s. Fashion Force, situated in India....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing, Dubai through their agent or their own office in the name of M/s. Fashion Force is carrying out quality check of the garments being exported. M/s. JPS Trading is rendering the service of a buying agent for M/s. Bon Prix, Germany. The service provider and service receiver are thus located in a non--taxable territory. There is neither any written or oral agreement between the Appellant and M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai. When M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai is a buying agent, he cannot be termed as a commission agent for the Appellant promoting export of garments. M/s. JPS Trading service is incidental to his rendering of buying agent service to M/s. Bon Prix, Germany. Whatever, the deductions shown in the export invoice of the Appellant are concerned ....