9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1717 - AT - Service TaxGTA Service - benefit of abatement - consignment notes in which the appellant could not produce the certificate as prescribed under CBEC Circular dated 27.05.2005 - benefit denied on the ground that the appellant is not a GTA but is liable to pay Service Tax as consignor/consignee - Held that - The appellant has expressed the difficulty in procuring the certificates as per CBEC Circular on dates which are subsequent to the actual dispatch of the consignments. Reliance was placed in the case of CST AHMEDABAD VERSUS M/S CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. 2010 (2) TMI 237 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD , where it was held that the requirements prescribed by the Board as per circular cannot be mandatory and cannot be used for denying substantive rights. It is not the case of the Revenue that the appellants have not received the service or service tax has not been paid. The demand of Service Tax in respect of those consignment notes where the certificates could not be produced is not justified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of Notification No.32/2004 regarding abatement of Service Tax for Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services. 2. Validity of requiring certificates from GTA for availing abatement benefits. 3. Dispute over the denial of abatement for consignment notes without certificates. Analysis: Issue 1: Interpretation of Notification No.32/2004 The appellant, a manufacturer, availed GTA services under reverse charge mechanism, paying Service Tax under GTA category with abatement benefits under Notification No.32/2004. The Department disputed abatement eligibility, claiming the appellant was not a GTA but a consignor/consignee. The Circular clarified that consignor/consignee can avail abatement by providing GTA certificates. The Commissioner (Appeals) granted abatement for consignment notes with certificates but upheld Service Tax for others. The appellant argued against the certificate requirement, citing legal precedents. The Tribunal noted the Circular's requirement and the appellant's difficulty in obtaining certificates post-dispatch. Relying on legal decisions, the Tribunal found the demand for Service Tax unjustified for consignment notes lacking certificates, overturning the impugned order. Issue 2: Validity of GTA certificates requirement The appellant contested the necessity of GTA certificates for abatement eligibility, referencing legal judgments. The Tribunal examined the Circular's requirement and the absence of such conditions in the relevant Notification. Noting the Circular's non-mandatory nature and the absence of challenges to the Tribunal's order, the Tribunal found the Commissioner's decision fair and just. Upholding the Tribunal's decision, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the appellant's inability to procure certificates for certain consignment notes post-dispatch. Issue 3: Denial of abatement for consignment notes without certificates The primary dispute revolved around denying abatement for consignment notes lacking GTA certificates. The Tribunal considered the appellant's challenges in obtaining certificates post-dispatch and legal precedents supporting the appellant's position. By following the Tribunal's decision and the Patna High Court's observations, the Tribunal deemed the Service Tax demand unjustified for consignment notes without certificates. Consequently, the Tribunal overturned the impugned order and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the fairness and legality of the Commissioner's decision in granting abatement based on available certificates. This detailed analysis highlights the Tribunal's thorough consideration of legal interpretations, precedents, and the practical challenges faced by the appellant in procuring GTA certificates for abatement benefits, leading to the favorable outcome of setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal.
|
