CESTAT, New Delhi Bench
Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar
Final Order Nos. ST/A/487-491 of 2012-Cus.
Appeal Nos. ST/741-745 of 2008
June 8, 2012
Mrs. Archna Wadhwa, Judicial Member – As the issue involved in all these appeals is identical, a common order is being passed.
2. The short issue involved is as to whether the appellants are entitled to the Cenvat credit of Service Tax paid on commission paid to overseas agents under the category of Business auxiliary services. Revenue by entertaining the view that such overseas agents services are not covered by the definition of input services, initiated proceedings for recovery of the credit availed by the appellants, resulting in passing of the impugned orders.
3. After hearing both sides, we find that the issue is no more res integra and stands settled by various decisions of the Tribunal. One such reference can be made to Tribunal’s decision in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. CCE  23 STT 224 (Ahd-CESTAT) wherein it was held that foreign commission agent services are admissible cenvatable services inasmuch as the same are for sale promotion.
4. To the similar effect is another decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Ambika Forgings 2010 (259) ELT 593 (Trib.-Delhi) laying down that overseas commission agent services promotes the assessee’s business activities and adds to Revenue earning by manufacture and sale of incremental quantity, activity may have nexus to such sales and Service Tax paid on such services has to be held as includable in the definition of inputs services.
5. Inasmuch as the issue is settled, we set aside the impugned orders and allow all the appeals with consequential relief to the appellants.