2011 (6) TMI 512 - HC - Service Tax

GTA service - order passed by Tribunal holding that the activity involved did not constitute GTA service - whether the respondents are even otherwise entitled to the benefit of a Notification No. 34/2004 Held that - Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act which is made applicable to the Finance Act 1994, the said question has to be determined by the Apex Court in an appeal filed under Section 35-L of the Act and the jurisdiction of this Court to go into the said question is expressly excluded under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, appeals rejected as not maintainable

Summary

Issues:
Whether the activity involved constitutes GTA service and is exigible to service tax.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against a common order by the Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore, which held that the activity in question did not fall under GTA service. The primary issue was whether the price paid to truck owners and operators for transporting goods by road is subject to service tax under the category of goods transport agency service. The Tribunal's decision was that it was not subject to service tax, leading to the question of whether the activity itself is liable to service tax.

The Court noted that Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, applicable to the Finance Act 1994, mandates that such questions must be determined by the Apex Court in an appeal filed under Section 35-L of the Act. The Court's jurisdiction to address this issue is explicitly excluded under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act. Citing a previous judgment in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax v. M/s. Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick (India), the Court held that the appeals were not maintainable. The Court rejected the appeals, granting the Revenue the liberty to file a statutory appeal under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act to the Apex Court.