9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax liability as per the provisions of Rule 2(d)(i)(5) r.w. Notification No. 35/2004-ST under reverse charge mechanism – Held that:- The fact that the consignment agents were acting as consignment agents may not ipso facto mean that they were paying freight also as agent of the principal - Further when both consigner and consignee fall in one of the specified categories under Notification No. 35/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals is about the service tax to be paid for transportation of the goods from the factory of the applicants to the consignment agents. It appears that the consignment agents have paid the service tax liability as per the provisions of Rule 2(d)(i)(5) of the Service Tax Rules, 1997 read with Notification No. 35/2004-ST dated 3.12.2004under reverse charge mechanism. It is not disputed that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. ST/102/2011 Hari Krishna P. Ltd. Rs.2,82,231/- 5. ST/103/2011 Hari Krishna P. Ltd. Rs.1,81,114/- 6. ST/104/2011 Amaravathi Sri Venkatesa Paper Mills P. Ltd. Rs.77,742/- The demands along with interest and penalty were confirmed by the original authority. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that the consignment agents did not pay the service tax fully as is evident from paragraph 25 of the impugned order. 5. We have considered the submissions of both sides. The fact that the consignment agents were acting as consignment agents may not ipso facto mean that they were paying freight also as agent of the principal. Further when both consigner and consignee fall in one of the specifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
