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 Laws/2010-11/1092

Leviability of service tax on demurrage charges on storage of export cargo – Commissioner (Appeal) can exercise power of adjudicating authority in the absence of power of remand.

Case:Cochin International Airport Ltd v/s Commr of C. Ex., Cochin
 
Citation:2011 (21) STR 169 (Tri-Bang)
 
Issue: - Leviability of service tax on demurrage charges on storage of export cargo – Commissioner (Appeal) can exercise power of adjudicating authority in the absence of power of remand.
 
Brief Facts: - Appellant had allowed many exporters to store their export cargo in their premises during the material time. Appellant collected demurrage charges for the same. Demand of service tax was raised on the demurrage charges. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand which was raised under the head of ‘Storage and Warehousing’ services. Interest was also demanded and penalty was also imposed.
 
In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeal) held that service tax was not leviable on any demurrage collected on agricultural produce and accordingly, case was remanded for re-quantifying the service tax on demurrage charges collected in respect of goods other than agricultural produce. Interest liability was upheld but penalty was set aside by granting benefit of Section 80 to the appellant.
 
Against this decision, appeal has been filed before the Tribunal.
 
On remand, the Adjudicating Authority passed fresh order re-confirming the demand of service tax on Demurrage with interest. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeal) noted that no evidence was produced by the appellant before him as well as before the lower authority. Relying upon judgment in Karnataka State Beverages Corporation v/s Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore [2006 (4) STR 469 (Tri-Bangalore)] the matter was once again remanded to the original authority. The said decision is also challenged before the Tribunal. 
 
Reasoning of Judgment: - The Tribunal held that in so far as storage of agricultural produce is concerned, Service tax I not leviable on any demurrage charges collected by the warehousing company inasmuch as the definition of “storage and warehousing”. Reliance was also made on Board Circular No. B11/1/2002-ST dated 01.08.2002.
 
The Tribunal further held that the Commissioner (Appeal) had rightly held in the first round of litigation that demurrage collected on agricultural produce was not chargeable to service tax. Therefore, pursuant to the remand order, it was not open to the Original Adjudicating Authority to demand service tax from the appellant in respect of such demurrage charges.
 
The remand order has been challenged on the ground that the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to remand as held by the Apex Court in the case of MIL India Ltd v/s Commissioner [2007 (210) ELT 188 (SC)].
 
The Tribunal held that the orders of the Lower Authority are liable to be set aside on this sole ground. The Tribunal noted that the contention of the appellant that no service tax was payable on the demurrage collected on any stored goods and they had relied on the judgment given in Karnataka State Beverages Corporation v/s Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore. But this contention was not considered by the lower appellate authority.
 
The question that whether demurrage charges were to be included in the taxable value of storage and warehousing services was a fundamental question which went to the root of the dispute between the assessee and the Department and the Commissioner (Appeal) ought to have addressed the issue. On the basis of judgment given in MIL India Ltd it was held that the Commissioner (Appeal) can exercise the power of adjudicating authority also when the Commissioner (Appeal) has no power of remand.
 
Accordingly, matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeal). It was also noted that the question that whether demurrage charges were to be included in the taxable value of storage and warehousing services is no longer res integra and is settled in favour of the assessee.
 
Decision: -Appeals disposed off.
 

***********

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