2016 (9) TMI 241 - AT - Service Tax

Demand of duty transportation of the goods from pit head to Railway siding within the mining area - classification of services GTA service cargo handling services reverse charge mechanism Held that - the decision followed as held in the case Arjuna Carriers P Vt. Ltd. vs. CCE & ST, Raipur vide Final Order No. 54920/2014-Cu(DB) dated 20.11.2014. the appellant s activity would fall under GTA service tax discharged by service receiver under reverse charge mechanism is correct demand of duty dismissed appeal allowed decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of services - Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services vs. Cargo handling services vs. Mining services

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, the issue revolved around the classification of services provided by the appellants for transportation of mine coal from pit head to railway siding within the mining area. The recipient of the service discharged the Service tax liability on a reverse charge basis, considering it as goods transport agency service. However, the Revenue contended that the services should be classified as cargo handling services until 30.5.07 and as mining services from 1.6.2007 onwards. Show cause notices were issued to the assessees, leading to the impugned orders by the original adjudicating authority.

The dispute between the assessees and the Revenue centered on whether the transportation services provided by the appellants should be categorized as goods transport agency services or classified under cargo handling services until a certain date and as mining services thereafter. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in the case of M/s. V N Transport vs. CCE, Raipur, where a similar issue was addressed. In that case, the Tribunal had ruled that transporting goods within the mines from pit head to Railway Siding should be considered as goods transport agency services, not mining services. Citing this precedent, the Tribunal in the present case set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeals with consequential relief for the appellants.

The Tribunal's decision was based on the principle of consistency with previous rulings in similar cases involving identical contracts with M/s. South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. The Tribunal emphasized that the issue had already been settled in previous cases, where it was established that the activities of the appellants amounted to providing services falling under goods transport agency services. By following the precedent set by the earlier decision, the Tribunal upheld that the impugned orders were unfounded, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellants, granting them consequential relief.