V.S. Distributors Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

V.S. Distributors vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jul 19, 2006

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/43150

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/43150
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: S Kang, Vice-, N T C.N.B.
Decided On: Jul 19, 2006
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V.S. Distributors

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

1. the appellant operates a lube godown of bpcl at bhilwara. his responsibility is to arrange a proper depot for storage and to sell the lubricants of bpcl. he sells the lubricants in the stationery of bpcl.the appellant receives from bpcl commission and other payments for its services.2. under the impugned order, the appellant has been charged service tax by treating it as a "clearing and forwarding agent" the present application seeks waiver of the requirement for pre-deposit of the tax and penalty so demanded.3. we have heard both the sides and perused the record. a perusal of the agreement between the parties makes it clear that the appellant neither clears nor forwards the lubricants in question. instead, it makes arrangement for storage and sells the lubricants. in this factual situation, prima facie, it is erroneous to treat it as a clearing and forwarding agent. the demand is not sustainable. accordingly, stay application is allowed and recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. The appellant operates a lube godown of BPCL at Bhilwara. His responsibility is to arrange a proper depot for storage and to sell the lubricants of BPCL. He sells the lubricants in the stationery of BPCL.

The appellant receives from BPCL commission and other payments for its services.

2. Under the impugned order, the appellant has been charged Service Tax by treating it as a "clearing and forwarding agent" The present application seeks waiver of the requirement for pre-deposit of the tax and penalty so demanded.

3. We have heard both the sides and perused the record. A perusal of the agreement between the parties makes it clear that the appellant neither clears nor forwards the lubricants in question. Instead, it makes arrangement for storage and sells the lubricants. In this factual situation, prima facie, it is erroneous to treat it as a clearing and forwarding agent. The demand is not sustainable. Accordingly, stay application is allowed and recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties V.S. Distributors vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge S Kang, Vice-, N T C.N.B.