2018-TIOL-1380-CESTAT-HYD

ST - Assessee is authorized dealer of vehicles manufactured by M/s Maruti Udyog Limited (MUL) - MUL have entered into agreements with various financial institutes including banks and general insurance companies to expand sale of their cars - The crux of department's case is that assessee, for arranging vehicle loans and vehicle insurance from Maruti Finance and Maruti Insurance to their customers, are getting commission amounts from said companies and hence they are promoting or marketing the business of those companies and receiving in lieu commission - MUL receive 3.5% commission from financial institutions out of which 3% is passed on to the dealer - Adjudicating authority has concluded that the fact of commission routed through MUL is of no consequence in view of Section 67 of the Act as value for any taxable service shall be the gross amount charged by service provider for taxable service rendered by him to his client and that it is nowhere provided that money should flow directly from the service recipient - Identical issue had been agitated before Tribunal in case of Popular Vehicles & Services Ltd. 2010-TIOL-776-CESTAT-BANG - In that case also, MUL had received commission from financial institutions and discharged service tax liability under "business auxiliary service" - So also in case of Ajmer Automobiles Pvt. LTd. , on similar issue, Tribunal has held that since MUL had paid the service tax on the entire commission, in such cases, tax is not payable again for the same amount - Hence, following the ratio already laid down by Tribunal on Popular Vehicles and Ajmer Automobiles , assessee cannot be burdened with any further tax liability provided MUL have discharged the liability correctly and within the prescribed period - Impugned order cannot sustain and is therefore set aside: CESTAT - Appeal allowed : HYDERABAD CESTAT

2018-TIOL-1379-CESTAT-BANG

ST - Subject matter of all appeals is regarding the CENVAT credit availed on various input services and CVD paid on imported goods - Aggrieved by disallowance of CENVAT credit, present appeals have been filed - In miscellaneous applications seeking withdrawal, he explained that the same are not meant for withdrawal of appeals but for conceding the claims for certain amounts which are not being pressed in present appeals - Such contentions of assessee can be considered at the time of final hearing of appeal regarding entitlement or otherwise of CENVAT credit - In circumstances, miscellaneous applications with liberty to the assessee to raise such points at the time of final hearing of the appeals: CESTAT - Misc application disposed of : BANGALORE CESTAT

2018-TIOL-1382-CESTAT-AHM

CX - the assessee company manufactures PP/HDPE Fabrics & availed Cenvat credit on capital goods - On physical verification being conducted in factory premises, the capital goods were found to be missing - The assessee claimed to have sold them off without raising sale invoices but cleared against delivery challans - Duty demand was raised for recovery of credit, along with imposition of interest & penalty - Such demands were confirmed by the Commr.(A) -

Held - Although the assessee availed credit on the machines, it later sold them, declaring them to be obsolete - Since the assessee failed to produce evidence showing sale price, the value sought to be put forward by the assessee cannot be accepted - Hence the duty demands are upheld: CESTAT (Para 2,3,8) - Appeal Dismissed : AHMEDABAD CESTAT

2018-TIOL-1381-CESTAT-DEL

CX - Issue relates to rejection of refund claim on the ground of unjust enrichment - Subject refund claimed amount had been reflected as "advance excise duty deposit" under column 'loans and advances' in Balance Sheet for relevant period - On the basis of records maintained by assessee, Chartered Accountant has also issued the Certificate, certifying that incidence of duty has not been passed on by assessee to any other person and the incidence of such amount has been borne by it - Further, affidavit issued by buyer of goods indicates that they have not paid the excess duty claimed by assessee in its invoice - Thus, the above documents prove beyond any shadow of doubt that the incidence of duty in this case has not been passed on by assessee and the same has been borne by it - Thus, doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable - Accordingly, assessee will be entitled for refund amount credited to Consumer Welfare Fund: CESTAT - Appeal allowed : DELHI CESTAT