The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ), New Delhi has determined that volume discounts received by M/s Divine Autotech Private Limited for purchasing large quantities of paints do not qualify as taxable services but are trade discounts. Consequently, the tribunal quashed the service tax demand on these amounts.
The case revolves around M/s Divine Autotech Private Limited, a Renault car dealer, which faced a demand for differential service tax for the period from April 2011 to March 2015. The Central Tax authorities issued a show cause notice, claiming unpaid service tax of Rs. 43,78,435, which included amounts received as volume discounts on paint purchases.
The appellant represented by Atul Gupta and Anmol Gupta argued that these volume discounts were incentives provided by paint manufacturers for purchasing large quantities. These discounts were akin to trade discounts given for bulk purchases and should not be treated as consideration for any service provided.
The respondent revenue, Commissioner of Central Tax, represented by Shri Anand Narayan contended that the volume discounts received by M/s Divine Autotech Private Limited for purchasing bulk quantities of paints should be treated as payments for a taxable service.
It was also argued that these discounts are akin to consideration for promoting the sale of the supplier’s paints and thus fall within the scope of service tax liability.
The CESTAT ruled that volume discounts are indeed trade discounts and not payments for services rendered. The tribunal emphasised that trade discounts given for bulk purchases are part of standard commercial practice and do not constitute taxable services under the Finance Act.
The decision reflects a clear understanding of the nature of volume discounts and their role in business transactions. The CESTAT clarified that trade discounts received for bulk purchases cannot be subjected to service tax.
The ruling is particularly significant for businesses across various sectors that receive similar discounts from suppliers and manufacturers, ensuring that they are not unfairly taxed on commercial incentives aimed at promoting bulk purchasing.
The ruling stressed the importance of distinguishing between trade discounts and payments for services in service tax matters. It also highlights the tribunal’s role in protecting businesses from undue tax burdens on transactions that do not fall within the scope of taxable services.
In its detailed order, CESTAT also addressed other aspects of the service tax demand on Divine Autotech, remanding certain issues back to the Commissioner for further examination. However, the bench was unequivocal in its decision to quash the service tax demand on volume discounts, providing a significant relief to the appellant.
In result, the two-member bench of the CESTAT comprising Ms. Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Mr. P. V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) set aside the demand for service tax on these volume discounts.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
