2012 (8) TMI 207 - AT - Service Tax

GTA services - Demand of service tax denial of Notification No.32/04-ST - conditions are to the effect that GTA services provider gives a declaration on every consignment note that he has not availed the benefit of Cenvat Credit of duty paid on the capital goods as also the benefit of Notification No.12/03-ST - said declaration do not stands given by the transporters, the benefit stands denied - Held that - In the absence of any prescribed format to make such declaration, the certificate given by the transporters are sufficient - matter remanded to original adjudicating authority for examining the said certificate

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of Notification No.32/04-ST and subsequent Notification No.1/06-ST for abatement of service tax.
2. Requirement of declaration by GTA services provider on consignment note.
3. Production of certificates by the transporters before the Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. The issue in this case revolves around the denial of abatement of service tax to the appellants under Notification No.32/04-ST and subsequent Notification No.1/06-ST. The Tribunal confirmed the service tax liability on the appellants for GTA services received by them, citing non-fulfillment of conditions specified in the notifications. The appellants were required to provide a declaration on every consignment note stating that they had not availed the benefit of Cenvat Credit or Notification No.12/03-ST. Since the transporters did not provide such declarations, the benefit of abatement was denied.

2. The Tribunal noted that the absence of a prescribed format for the declaration led to varied interpretations. Previous decisions of the Tribunal, such as Paliwal Home Furnishing v. CST, CCE v. Godavari Pipes (P.) Ltd., CCE v. H.T. Media, Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE, CCE v. Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd., and R.A.K. Ceramics India (P.) Ltd. v. CCE, emphasized that certificates provided by transporters could suffice in the absence of a specific format. The appellants later produced these certificates before the Tribunal, although they were not submitted to the lower authorities initially.

3. Considering the production of certificates by the appellants, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority for further examination in light of the certificates and the precedent decisions referred to. The Tribunal disposed of the stay petition and appeal accordingly, highlighting the importance of fulfilling the conditions specified in the notifications for availing abatement of service tax on GTA services.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides insights into the legal complexities surrounding the applicability of notifications, the necessity of declarations, and the evidentiary value of certificates in tax disputes related to GTA services.