Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2013-14/1606

Commission forgone by automobile dealers if banks provide loans at low rate of interest liable to service tax under BAS.
Case:-TOYOTA LAKOZY AUTO PVT LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, MUMBAI-II

Citation:-  2013-TIOL-814-CESTAT-MUM


 Brief Facts:-Common issue is involved. Therefore, the applications for waiver of pre-deposit are being taken up together. The applicants filed the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of total amount of service tax of Rs. 3,15,81,666/-, interest and penalties.
 
The applicants are dealers of motor vehicles of M/s Toyota Kirloskar Motors Ltd. A total amount of Rs. 2,02,82,946/- was confirmed on the ground that the applicants are providing service of commission agent to the car manufactures. A demand of Rs. 65,56,549/- is confirmed on the charges received from customers for registration of car with the state registration authority on the ground that the applicants are providing customer care service on behalf of the manufacturers. A demand of Rs.22,09,353/- is confirmed in respect of commission foregone on marketing of loan of various banks.
 
Appellant Contentions:- The Appellant submits that the applicant is not acting as commission agent of the car manufacturers. The applicant is a registered dealer and purchasing cars from the manufacturer and thereafter selling the same on payment of appropriate VAT. As the applicants are purchasing and selling the car, therefore, it cannot be said that the applicants are commission agent of the car manufacturer. Hence the demand is not sustainable. In respect of the demand of Rs.65,56,549/-, the contention of the applicant is that the applicant is providing assistance of the car purchasers in respect of registration of the car with the RTO. The demand is confirmed on the ground that the applicants are providing business auxiliary service as the applicants are providing customer care service on behalf of the manufacturer as the applicants are purchasing the car from the manufacturer. The appellant submit that there cannot be any customer car service on behalf of the manufacturer when the applicants are assisting the car purchasers with the state transport authorities, it cannot be said that the applicants are promoting the business of state transport authorities as the applicants are only providing assistance for consideration to the car purchasers.
 
In respect of the demand of Rs. 22,09,353/-, the contention of the applicant is that in case where the car purchasers want to avail the facility of loan from the banks, the applicants are negotiating on behalf of the customers with the bank regarding the rate of interest and in case the rate of interest Is agreed to be lower than the existing rateof interest, the applicants are foregoing part of the commission receivable from the banks and the applicants are paying service tax on the commission received from the banks. Hence the demand is not sustainable.
 
Respondent Contentions:-The Respondent submitted that the applicants are interested in promoting the business of car manufacturer as the applicants are registered dealer. Therefore, the applicants are receiving certain amounts by way of dealer discount. Hence the demand is rightly made.
 
In respect of other demands, the contention is that the applicants are providing assistance to the car purchasers in getting loan at lower rate by foregoing their commission does not has force. Hence the demand is rightly made.
 
 
Reasoning of Judgment:-We have considered the submission from both side and perused the record, we find that the applicants are registered dealers of the car manufacturers M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt Ltd. and are purchasing the car and thereafter selling on payment of VAT. In these circumstances prima facie we find merit in the contention of the applicant that the applicants are not acting as commission agent of the manufacturer. On the same ground the amount received from the car purchaser for registration of the cars with the state transport authorities it cannot be said that the applicants are providing customer care service on behalf of the manufacturer.
 
In respect of the demand of Rs. 22,09,353/- the applicants are negotiating with the banks on behalf of the customers regarding car loan and where the banks agreed to give lower rate of interest the applicants foregone part of their commission. On this issue prima facie we find that the applicants are receiving commission from the banks and the applicants are foregoing part of commission in case where the bank agrees to reduce the rate of interest; the applicants had not made a case for waiver of pre-deposit of the dues.
 
Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants are directed to deposit an amount of rupees ten lakhs only within eight weeks. On deposit of the above mentioned amount, pre-deposit of the balance amount of service tax, interest and penalties are waived.
 
Decision:- Part pre-deposit ordered.
 
Comment:-  The analogy drawn from this case is that the amount received from the car purchaser for registration of the cars with the state transport authorities does not indicates that the applicants are providing customer care service on behalf of the manufacturer. However, the applicants foregoing part of the commission receivable from the banks if banks granted loans at low rate of interest will be leviable to service tax under BAS as it amounts to promoting the business of bank by the appellant.
 
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com