For example, in respect of Air exports, for the year 20002001 the Freight revenue is of the order of 8.8 crores. That means, this amount represents the freight collected by the appellants towards air freight for the customers and then paid to the airliners. This amount has also been sought to be taxed under the Customs House Agent activity. This shows the adjudicating authority has not applied his mind to the details of the various activities undertaken by the appellants and how they relate to the amount collected by them. In respect of air exports apart from freight, they collected various other charges i.e. Cartage revenue, MSIL/JWG charges, due carrier, documentation etc. In all these cases the services are rendered by the third party and the appellants initially make payment for the activities on behalf of the client and later collect the amount from the clients. These are actually reimbursable expenses and they do not relate to any CHA activities. In these cases, on going through the statement, we find that in certain cases the appellants had incurred less cost and in certain cases, they had incurred more cost. In any case, the profit or loss incurred in respect of activities which are not related to CHA activities should not be the concern of the Department for the purpose of collecting service tax. The Apex Court’s decision in Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. case (supra), even though it relates to the Central Excise, has definitely a bearing on this. If the appellant performs an activity which is not related to the customs house agent then service tax cannot be levied on that activity under the category of CHA services. Similarly, we have seen the break up of all other services. It was already pointed out by the appellants that in certain cases, the appellants directly render certain services which do not relate to CHA
