TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 107
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had to be sold at throw away prices. Resultantly, HIL was not able to fetch prices of the commodities like Sulphuric Acid, therefore a meeting was held on 01.03.2006 wherein parties mutually decided that the Cargo Handling Service charges of Rs. 50 per MT will not be levied by the appellant for the purpose of export of Sulphuric Acid. Accordingly, the reason behind providing services to HIL at discounted price was that HIL had made substantial investment in laying pipeline from their manufacturing facility to the DHIL jetty wherein the technical staff for HIL provided the meagre service of connecting the storage tank with the jetty pipeline for export of Sulphuric Acid. Since, the entire process was made automated, the activity on the part of the appellant was very minimal. In absence of any service being provided by the Appellant, the appellant stopped charging 'Cargo Handling Charges' from M/s. HIL. Audits were carried out by the officers of Central Excise Department during the course of which, it was observed that the Appellant was not collecting cargo handling charges from M/s. HIL for the export of Sulphuric Acid. On the basis of the aforesaid fact, a view was formed by the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w Delhi. Dynasty Oil and Gas Pvt Ltd V Commissioner, CGST, Mumbai, 2022 (9) TMI 1061 CESTAT Mumbai SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pr. Commissioner, CGST, Mumbai, 2022(7) TMI 457- CESTAT- Mumbai 2.2. He further submit that the valuation adopted by the Department is incorrect. Rule 3 of Service Tax (Determination of Value ) Rules, 2006 is not invokable in the present case. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of CCE Vs. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd., 2022 (1) TMI 317- CESTATE, Ahmedabad. Without prejudice to the above submission, he further submits that demand under the category of 'Cargo Handling Services' is not sustainable when the service under consideration is appropriately classifiable under the category of 'Port Services'. He placed reliance on the following Judgments:- Prime Deelopers V. CCE & ST, 2023-TIOL-884-CESTAT-AHM M/s. Shanti Builders V. CST, 2023-TIOL-730-CESTAT-AHD Real Value Promoters Pvt. Ltd. V. CGST 7 CE, Chennai, 2018-TIOL-2876-CESTAT-MAD Kalptaru Power Transmission Ltd Vs. CGST & CEX- Gandhinagar 2.3. He also submits that the demand is time barred as the first audit was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1. This issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise VS. Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd., 2023-VIL-SC-ST (Supra) which was upheld by the Apex Court the relevant order of the Tribunal is reproduced below :- "Revenue is aggrieved by the dropping of proceedings, initiated against M/s Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd for having provided 'corporate guarantee' on behalf its subsidiaries located within and outside India and not discharging tax liability thereto as provider of 'banking and other financial services' for the period prior to, and after, 30th June 2012, in order-in-original no. ME/COMM/KCG/13/2017-18 dated 27th October 2017 of Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Mumbai East. The show cause notice had proposed recovery of Rs. 97,95,62,947/-, comprising Rs. 3,22,01,255/- towards provision of guarantee to overseas companies for which consideration had been received and of Rs. 94,73,61,692/- towards guarantees provided free of charge to their Indian subsidiaries, for rendering taxable service under section 65(105)(zm) of Finance Act, 1994 till 30th June 2012 and 'service' defined in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... monetarily, was recompensed by the improved credit rating of its subsidiary companies. 4. According to Learned Counsel for the respondent, the issue stands decided by the decision of the Tribunal in DLF Cyber City Developers Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi-V [2019 (28) G.S.T.L. 478 (Tri. - Chan.)] holding that '3. It is an admitted fact that the appellant-assessee has not received any consideration from either from the financial institutions or from their associates for providing corporate guarantee, in that circumstances, no service tax is payable by the appellant-assessee. Moreover, the demand raised in the show cause notices are on the basis of assumption and presumption presuming that their associates have received the loan facilities from the financial institution at lower rate, therefore, the differential amount of interest is consideration, but there is no such evidence produced by the revenue on that behalf. In that circumstances, we hold that the appellant-assessee are not liable to pay any service tax on corporate guarantee provided by the appellant-assessee to various banks/financial institutions on behalf of their holding company/associ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion of the Tribunal in re Kaveri Agri Care Pvt. Ltd. as it is settled law that interim orders do not offer themselves as binding precedent and the lack of elaboration of the observation therein detracts from its employability to advance the case of Revenue. The decision of the Tribunal in re Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd deals with an entirely different set of facts and the explanation therein of 'guarantee', as commonly understood, for placing that dispute in a context is of no assistance here. 8. The criticality of 'consideration' for determination of service, as defined in section 65B(44) of Finance Act, 1994, for the disputed period after introduction of 'negative list' regime of taxation has been rightly construed by the adjudicating authority. Any activity must, for the purpose of taxability under Finance Act, 1994, not only, in relation to another, reveal a 'provider', but also the flow of 'consideration' for rendering of the service. In the absence of any of these two elements, taxability under section 66B of Finance Act, 1994 will not arise. It is clear that there is no consideration insofar as 'corporate guarantee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f service tax payable, the value of such taxable service shall be such amount as, with the addition of tax payable, is equal to the gross amount charged. (3) The gross amount charged for the taxable service shall include any amount received towards the taxable service before, during or after provision of such (4) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (1), (2) and (3). the value shall be determined in such manner as may be prescribed. Explanation. - For the purposes of this section- (a) "consideration" includes any amount that is payable for the taxable services provided or to be provided. (b) [*] (c) "gross amount charged includes payment by cheque, credit card, deduction from account and any form of payment by issue of credit notes or debit notes and [book adjustment, and any amount credited or debited, as the case may be, to any account, whether called "Suspense account" or by any other name, in the books of account of a person liable to pay service tax, where the transaction of taxable service is with any associated enterprise.]" 4.2. From the above Section the value to service is for a consideration in money, be the gross amou....