Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law /2016-17/3334

Leviability of tax under the head ‘port services’
Case:-ASHOK INTERNATIONAL VersusCOMMISSIONER OF C. EX., VISAKHAPATNAM-II
Citation:-2016 (43) S.T.R. 430 (Tri. - Hyd.)
Brief facts:-M/s. Ashok International is in appeal against order-in-original No. 48/2008(PVR), dated 31st October, 2008 of Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Vishakapatnam-II that has confirmed tax and cess of Rs. 1,12,56,799/- for rendering ‘port services’ during the period 1st July, 2003 to 31st March, 2007 and Rs. 4,62,125/- for rendering ‘storage and warehousing services’ along with interest besides imposing penalties.
Appellant’s contention:-Appellant contests the levying of tax under the head ‘port services’ on the ground that Section 65(81) and Section 65(82) of Finance Act, 1994 are intended to tax service rendered by a port or person authorized by a port in relation to vessels or goods whereas the appellant is in the business of cargo handling, stevedoring and storage. Admitting that they are licenced to handle certain activities within a port area, they contend that they are not a port and that the licence issued to them is not an authorization within the meaning of Section 65(82) and that insofar as Kakinada Port is concerned, they were merely accorded permission to operate in the port area. Decisions of the Tribunal in Shreeji Shipping v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Rajkot [2014 (36)S.T.R.569 (Tri.-Ahmd.)], Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmedabad v. NOVA Enterprises [2015 (38)S.T.R.1012 (Tri.-Ahmd.), M/s. Velji P & Sons (Agencies) (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar [2007 (8)S.T.R.236 (Tri.-Ahmd.)], Homa Engineering Works v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2007-TIOL-769-CESTAT-MUM = 2007 (7)S.T.R.546 (Tribunal)] were cited. The decision of the Tribunal in M/s. VBC Exports Ltd. v Commissioner of Central Excise, Vishakapatnam [2008-TIOL-874-CESTAT-BANG = 2008 (10)S.T.R.613 (Tribunal)], holding that stevedoring is ‘cargo handling service’ not liable to tax in relation to exports was also cited.
Respondent’s contention:-The respondent reiterated the findings of the impugned order.
Reasoning of judgment:-The Tribunal heard both the sides.
The demand pertains to the period between 2003 and 2007 and the definition of ‘port service’ in Section 65(82) of Finance Act, 1994 relevant to the period is -
‘means any service rendered by a port or other port or any person authorised by such port or other port, in any manner, in relation to a vessel or goods’
and it was only with effect from 1st July, 2010 that it was amended to -
‘any service rendered within a port or other port, in any manner’
‘Port’ in this definition as per Section 65(81) is a major port and ‘other port’ as per Section 65(76) is a minor port under the Central Government or a State Government respectively.
With the  change in definition in 2010, the scope of activities covered by Section 65(105)(zn) and Section 65(105)(zzl) of Finance Act, 1994 altered substantially to include services other than those that were statutorily or conventionally rendered by a port authority, by whatever name called.
It would  appear that the amendment was intended to tax all services rendered in a port and to eliminate the rigour of separate classification of each and every type of taxable service within a port. Thus, from July, 2010, the omnibus entry could extend to all services rendered by anyone legitimately operating within a port. Conversely, the umbrella coverage did not exist during the period of dispute in this panel. The appellant is not a ‘port’ under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 or ‘other port’ under Indian Ports Act, 1908. Therefore, the test of taxability of service rendered by appellant would rest on whether these are activities rendered normally by a port and which the port has in turn authorised them to perform.
Ports are statutorily required to handle goods and  vessels; to that extent they provide a safe harbour for ships with berths for holding them fast. These are generally presented as pilotage and berth hire. In relation to goods, ports provide space for storage - either in the open or in covered godowns - and ports collect wharfage. Handling of cargo is not a part of the core activities of the port. Even if the port authority in a major port does handle it, it is performed through the Dock Labour Board which is an official stevedore.
It would, therefore, appear that ports licence  entities to interact with them and with others in relation to vessels and cargo, steamer agents, stevedores, ship chandlers, etc., which are not in the nature of authorisation to perform such activities that the port otherwise undertakes.
In  Shreeji Shipping v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Rajkot [2014 (36)S.T.R.569 (Tri.-Ahmd.)], this Tribunal considered various decisions including others cited on behalf of the appellant and arrived at the conclusion that the taxable entry supra does not cover activities such as stevedoring.
In the matter of tax on ‘storage and warehousing  service’ allegedly rendered by the appellant, learned counsel drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in Kerala State Industrial Enterprise Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Kochi [2012 (28) S.T.R. 574 (Ker.)] to the effect that tax is exempted on such services as are related to export cargo. The appellant aggregates agriculture produce for exports.
Turning to the definition of ‘storage and  warehousing’ in Section 65(102) of Finance Act, 1994, we find, that it specifically excludes service in relation to agriculture produce. On this count, too, the demand of tax on the service rendered by the appellant is untenable.
The appellant handles cargo which involves loading,  unloading and transporting. Moreover, such handlers are often required to provide space for aggregation and security of cargo till they are ready to be moved to the vessels carrying these. The ‘storage and warehousing’ that is intended to be taxed is a specialised field that has for long held a vital position in commodity logistics. Such warehouse keepers are recognised in law as transit custodians with enacted responsibility and rights over the goods. Even to the extent of according the right of transfer of ownership through the transfer of warehouse receipt. The storage space provided by the appellant does not fall within that category but is one of renting of space. The demand of tax, therefore, is not sustainable.
For the above reasons, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
Decision:-Appeal allowed.
Comment:-The gist of the case is that the assessee is providing the services of cargo handling, stevedoring and storage. These activities do not fall under ‘Port services’ as the same are not undertaken in the capacity of Port or person authorized by Port. Further, the assessee is not a ‘Port’ under Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 or under Indian Ports Act, 1908. The demand pertains to period 2003-07 and activities of appellant are not covered under expanded definition of ‘Port services’ in said Section 65(82) ibid which came into effect in 2010 and included all services rendered legitimately within a port in any manner besides services rendered statutorily by Port authorities. Hence, demand is not sustainable as per Sections 65(82) and 73 of Finance Act, 1994. Further, tax is exempted on storage and warehousing services if they relate to agriculture produce for export, hence, the aforesaid services are exempted from payment of tax. Since, the appellant is only a transit custodian of goods warehoused and storage space provided is only renting of space for goods in transit , hence, demand of tax is not sustainable
Prepared by:- Praniti Lalwani
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