2015 (8) TMI 254 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - GTA service - Transportation of lime stones from mines - Held that - The total demand is made on the total payment made to the truck owners for the period 2006-07 to 2010-11. The issue of fortnightly bill payments and also whether issue of consignment note needs detailed consideration. However, taking into account the appellant s submission that in certain number of cases for each trip where the freight amount exceeds ₹ 750 per ton, as per their own worksheet total freight amount paid by them works out to ₹ 6,52,881/-. Appellants have not made out a prima facie case for waiver of predeposit. Accordingly, we direct the appellant to predeposit a sum of ₹ 1,00,000 within 4 weeks - Partial stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
1. Demand of service tax and penalty for transportation of lime stones under Transport of Goods by Road Service category.
2. Interpretation of Section 65(105)(zzp) of Finance Act and Section 65(50b) in relation to GTA service.
3. Applicability of service tax on truck operators engaged by the appellant.
4. Consideration of waiver of predeposit based on appellant's submissions.

The judgment addressed the issue of a demand for service tax and penalty imposed on transportation of lime stones, categorized under Transport of Goods by Road Service. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand for the period from 2006-07 to 2010-11, treating the service as GTA Service under Section 65(105)(zzp) of the Finance Act read with Section 65(50b). The appellant argued that there was no GTA service involved as all truck operators were individual owners transporting lime stones from mining to crushing areas, paying freight charges based on weighment slips and raising bills fortnightly. The appellant contended that since there was no transport agency and no consignment notes issued, service tax liability did not apply as per Section 65(50b) of the Finance Act. The appellant also highlighted that the gross amount charged per consignment was generally less than Rs. 750 per metric ton, supported by detailed worksheets and referring to a relevant judgment.

After hearing both sides and reviewing the records, the tribunal observed that the appellant had been consistently paying service tax on GTA services. However, the specific demand in question pertained to the transportation of lime stones by individual contractor/truck operators engaged by the appellant. Despite no consignment notes being issued, fortnightly bills were raised by the contractors. The tribunal noted that the total demand was based on payments made to the truck owners during the mentioned period. The issue of fortnightly bill payments and the necessity of consignment notes required further examination. The tribunal acknowledged the appellant's submission regarding cases where the freight amount exceeded Rs. 750 per ton, with the total freight amount paid by the appellant amounting to Rs. 6,52,881. The tribunal concluded that the appellant had not established a prima facie case for a waiver of predeposit. Consequently, the tribunal directed the appellant to predeposit Rs. 1,00,000 within four weeks. Upon depositing the specified amount, the predeposit of the remaining demand would be waived, and recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency, with a compliance report due on a specified date.

This judgment delves into the intricate details of the service tax demand related to the transportation of lime stones, emphasizing the distinction between GTA services and individual truck operators engaged by the appellant. The tribunal's analysis focused on the contractual arrangements, billing practices, and the absence of consignment notes to determine the applicability of service tax. The tribunal's decision to require a predeposit while considering the appellant's submissions underscores the nuanced considerations involved in tax liability disputes within the realm of transportation services.