2016 (11) TMI 1441 - AT - Service Tax

Abatement - GTA Services - N/N. 32/2004-S.T., dated 3-12-2004 and N/N. 1/2006-S.T., dated 1-3-2006 - Board s Circular No. B1/6/2005-TRU, dated 27-7-2005 - Held that - the respondents are entitled to avail benefit of exemption vide the notifications subject to fulfillment of conditions prescribed therein - As per Board s Circular No. B1/6/2005-TRU, dated 27-7-2005, the declaration by service provider in all such cases on the consignment note, to the effect that the conditions of the notification have been satisfied would be sufficient to avail the benefit - abatement allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues involved: Eligibility of respondent to claim abatement from GTA service provider under Notifications No. 32/2004-S.T., dated 3-12-2004 and No. 1/2006-S.T., dated 1-3-2006.

Analysis:
The appeal in question dealt with the eligibility of the respondent to claim abatement from a GTA service provider under specific notifications. The adjudicating authority had initially dropped proceedings, stating that the respondents were entitled to the benefits outlined in the notifications due to a clarification by the Board. The Department, dissatisfied with this decision, filed an appeal challenging the order.

During the hearing, the learned AR reiterated the grounds of appeal, highlighting the lack of a clear finding in the impugned order, while no representation was made on behalf of the respondent. Upon reviewing the case's facts, it was noted that the adjudicating authority had examined the issue and concluded that the respondents were indeed entitled to avail the exemption provided in the notifications, subject to fulfilling the prescribed conditions. The procedure outlined in a specific circular was to be followed, where a declaration by the service provider on the consignment note confirming compliance with the notification conditions would suffice to claim the benefit.

Based on the circular's provisions and the findings of the adjudicating authority, the Tribunal determined that there was no justification for interfering with the impugned order. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the entitlement of the respondents to the abatement benefits from the GTA service provider as per the relevant notifications.

This judgment underscores the significance of adhering to prescribed procedures and conditions outlined in notifications and circulars when claiming benefits or exemptions under specific provisions. It highlights the importance of clear findings and adherence to regulatory requirements in such matters to ensure fair and consistent application of tax laws.