ANAND TISSUES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THE applicant filed this application for waiver of pre -deposit of Service Tax of Rs. 3,89,510/ - and penalty. The demand of Service Tax was confirmed on the ground that the applicant is engaged in providing the Service of Clearing and Forwarding Agent.

(3.) THE contention of the applicant is that he is not covered the scope of Clearing and Forwarding Agent under the definition as defined under Section 65 of Finance Act. The contention is that he is only arranged meeting between M/s. Broadcast Equipment (India) Ltd. and supplier of the goods i.e. M/s. Dragon Capital (Hong Kong) Ltd. He has not dealt with the goods nor he received the goods or warehoused the goods, therefore, the demand of Service Tax is not sustainable. The applicant also pointed out that he has already deposited the amount of Rs. 97,427/ - at the time of hearing of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals). The applicant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Ram Shree Steels Pvt. Ltd. to submit that where the assessee was working as a commission agent, only the demand of Service Tax as Clearing and Forwarding Agent was set aside.