CESTAT CUSTOMS APPEALS BRANCH AT N. DELHI vide Final Order No.ST/191/2009 CU (DB) dt 21/05/09 in re: AMITDEEP MOTORS vs CCE ALLAHABAD held as follows: -
QUOTE : We have gone through the clearing and forwarding agency definition appearing under Section 65 (25) of the Finance Act, 1994. The nature of transaction between Maruti Udyog and the buyer were sales of goods upon the order procured by the Maruti dealer which is the appellant. The invoices shown to us as appearing at page 114 to 122 of the appeal folder were subject matter of taxation under Cental Sales Tax Act, 1956. The invoices clearly reflect that the buyer was the Commandant Central Ordinance Depot and movement of goods were from Gurgaon by Maruti to the buyer and that was at the risk of the buyer on delivery at Gurgaon itself. There is nothing available on the record to appreciate that the appellant acted as a consignee of the goods by the consignor Maruti Udyog Ltd. We are, therefore, compelled to hold that a sale transaction cannot be converted into a service provided under the category of clearing and forwarding service. All the elements of sale of goods being present in these transactions, the appellant should certainly be stated to be noservice provider of taxable service in this appeal. Also the appellant’s case gets supports from the Larger Bench decision cited by the Ld. Consultant as aforesaid. [2006(3) STR 321 (Tri-LB)--Revenue lost its appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CCEX  JALANDHAR vs UNITED PLASTOMARS  [2008(10)str 229 (P&H)].

[for full text of the judgement please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com  and click on the citation taxind_2009_pb_st_191]

CESTAT JUDGEMENT

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

CESTAT ORDERS CLEARING AND FORWARDING AGENCY, ELEMENTS OF SALE OF GOODS, FINANCE ACT 1994