V.S. DISTRIBUTORS Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LD . Counsel Ms. Asmita Nayak submits that the appellant had agreement with BPCL for storage of lubricants of that concern. There was no clearing activity carried by the appellant to fall under the category of Clearing & Forwarding services. She has relied upon page No. 17 to show that the agreement was between BPCL and the appellant. She submits that even though payments were linked to quantity and the loading and unloading charges were paid as per paragraph 19 of the agreement, that does not relate to clearing and forwarding activity. Therefore, following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CCE, Panchkula v. Kulcip Medicines(P) Ltd. reported in, 2009 TIOL 202 HC -P&H -ST the appellant is entitled to succeed in its appeal.

(2.) LD . DR Shri Sunil Kumar brings to our notice that the agreement at page 17 has not been signed by BPCL. To this objection, Ld. Counsel replies that BPCL has signed at the end of the document and that cannot be doubted when the authorities all along have leaned over the same. It was at page 23 of the appeal folder. Ld. DR further submits that reading of the document enabled the authorities below to hold that the appellant is providing clearing and forwarding services.

(3.) WHILE agreeing with my learned brother's finding that the authorities have not examined the invoices issued by the Appellants for ascertaining the nature of their service as discussed below, I am of the view that from the Appellant's agreement with BPCL at page 17 to 23 of the appeal paper book, it is clear that the Appellant's activity is not covered by the definition of C&F Agent's service.