2020 (4) TMI 43 - AT - Service Tax

Recovery of short paid service tax alongwith interest and penalty - GTA Services - period October 2006 to March 2007 - HELD THAT - A perusal of the order passed by the Principal Commissioner clearly shows that the Chartered Accountant certificate submitted by the appellant to substantiate his claim regarding exemption under the notification dated 3 December 2004 has not been considered at all, even though in the earlier part of the order the Principal Commissioner has noted that the appellant had produced the said certificate during the course of hearing of the appeal on 12 May 2015. There is no good reason as to why the certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant should not have been taken into consideration and in any case if there was any doubt, the Principal Commissioner could have sought information from the appellant to satisfy himself about the claim of exemption made by the appellant, but that was not done. This inaction on the part of the appellant was required to be examined in the light of the Circular dated 11 June 2007 issued by the Central Board of Excise Customs. This Circular clearly mentioned that in small consignment it may not be possible to goods transport agency to provide the vehicle number and that in such a case this could be provided at a later stage. The Principal Commissioner, if he wanted to satisfy himself about the vehicle numbers, could have required the appellant to submit proper documents but that was not done. It would be appropriate to remand the matter to the Principal Commissioner for a fresh consideration - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Assessment of service tax liability based on exemption notification under the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in providing "goods transport agency" services, contested a demand for service tax raised by the Principal Commissioner. The appellant argued that the gross booking amount included exempted services, as per a notification granting exemption for consignments below a certain value. The appellant submitted a certified chart to support this claim, emphasizing no short payment. However, the Principal Commissioner confirmed the tax demand, noting missing details in the invoices and delayed exemption claim submission.

The appellant highlighted the Chartered Accountant's certificate demonstrating the exemption claim, submitted in 2009 and during the appeal hearing in 2015. The appellant also referenced a Circular allowing for later submission of vehicle numbers for small consignments. The Department's Authorized Representative supported the Principal Commissioner's decision, emphasizing the appellant's responsibility to substantiate the exemption claim pending since 2009.

The Tribunal found that the Principal Commissioner did not consider the Chartered Accountant's certificate supporting the exemption claim, despite its submission. The Tribunal criticized the emphasis on missing vehicle numbers in invoices, noting the Circular's provision for later submission. It rejected the Department's argument that the appellant should have provided all documents upfront, emphasizing the Principal Commissioner's failure to seek clarification before passing the order.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter to the Principal Commissioner for a fresh determination, allowing the appellant to submit additional documents if necessary. The appellant was granted the opportunity to raise further grounds in support of their claim, and the appeal was allowed accordingly.