2015 (8) TMI 108 - AT - Service Tax

Service tax liability on an amount paid by the appellant to the transporter, for transportation of coal within the mining area - Goods Transport Agency service - Held that - since where admittedly no consignment notes were issued by the transporters for transportation of the appellants coal, the Goods Transport Agency service cannot be held to have been rendered. - Issue is no more res integra as the judgment of the principal bench in the case of South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. 2014 (8) TMI 857 - CESTAT NEW DELHI was considering identical/similar issue - we set aside the impugned orders - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Service tax liability on amount paid to transporter for coal transportation within mining area.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with three appeals against Order-in-Originals related to service tax liability on payments made by a coal fields company to transporters for coal transportation within the mining area. The period in question is from 01.01.2005 to 31.07.2007. The revenue claimed that the payments fall under Goods Transport Agency Service. The appellant argued that the issue was already settled by a previous Tribunal decision and that the show-cause notice was time-barred. They also referred to a CBEC Circular for clarification on service tax liability. The Departmental Representative mentioned an appeal against a similar judgment before the High Court.

The main issue revolved around whether the transportation of coal within the mining area by the appellant to the railway siding falls under Goods Transport Agency Service. The appellant argued that as no consignment note was issued by the transporter, the service should not be taxed. However, the Departmental Representative contended that the Truck Authorisation Slip served as a consignment note. The Tribunal found that the issue was not new as a previous judgment had addressed a similar scenario. The Tribunal then reproduced the key points from the previous order regarding the necessity of a consignment note for a service to be classified under Goods Transport Agency.

The Tribunal analyzed the facts and legal principles laid out in the previous judgment. It was established that the absence of consignment notes from the transporters meant that the service did not fall under Goods Transport Agency. The Tribunal cited precedents to support this conclusion. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that they were not liable for service tax. The judgment also addressed the point of limitation, noting that since the issue was covered by their own judgment, they did not need to make a separate finding on the limitation aspect. Ultimately, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with any consequential relief.

In conclusion, the judgment provides a detailed analysis of the service tax liability issue concerning coal transportation within a mining area. It emphasizes the importance of consignment notes in determining the applicability of Goods Transport Agency Service and relies on legal precedents to support its decision in favor of the appellant.