9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 10 - AT - Service TaxGTA Service - N/N. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 and N/N. 12/2003-ST dated 20.06.2003 - denial of benefit on the ground that appellant submitted only a certificate from the transporters/truck owners on their letterhead - CBEC vide Circular No.B1/6/2005-TRU dt. 27.07.200 - Held that - CBEC vide Circular No.B1/6/2005-TRU dt. 27.07.2005 clarified that the declaration as required under Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 can be made on the letterhead of the transport company. Hon ble Gujarat High Court at Ahmedabad in the case of Commr. Of C.Ex, Cus Service Tax vs. Neral Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. 2008 (12) TMI 121 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD and held that substantial benefit cannot be denied for minor procedural lapses. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
1. Availing benefit of service tax exemptions under Notification No.32/2004-ST and Notification No.12/2003-ST for a Government Contractor engaged in road construction. 2. Compliance with conditions for exemption eligibility. 3. Submission of required documentation for availing exemptions. 4. Interpretation of relevant case laws and circulars for exemption procedures. 5. Applicability of previous judicial decisions on similar matters. Analysis: 1. The appellant, a Government Contractor involved in road construction, utilized trucks or Goods Transport Agencies (GTAs) for transporting materials. The appellant sought exemption benefits under Notification No.32/2004-ST and Notification No.12/2003-ST. Two show cause notices were issued concerning service tax amounts. 2. To avail the exemptions, certain conditions were specified, including not claiming credit on duty paid on inputs or capital goods and not utilizing benefits under Notification No.12/2003-ST. The appellant submitted certificates from transporters confirming compliance with these conditions. 3. The appellant was requested to provide consignment notes for verification, but only submitted certificates from transporters/truck owners. The appellant referenced various case laws to support their position, emphasizing compliance with exemption conditions. 4. The Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) clarified that the required declaration under Notification No.32/2004-ST could be made on the transport company's letterhead. The issue was considered settled based on previous judicial decisions, including a ruling by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. 5. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in a similar case supported the appellant's position, emphasizing the importance of complying with exemption procedures as prescribed by the Board. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision based on Departmental Circulars and previous judicial precedents. In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, citing adherence to superior court decisions and supporting the appellant's eligibility for the service tax exemptions.
|
