9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry of ‘Technical Inspection & Certification Service’ and in the capacity of service receiver, the respondents was liable to pay the service tax on ‘Goods Transport Service’. Tribunal considered the Notification No. 32/2004-S.T., dated 3-12-2004 which provided for abatement of 75% of the gross amount charged from the customer for the purpose of calculating the liability of service tax subject to the condition that the no CENVAT Credit had been availed and benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 also had not been availed - requirements prescribed by the Board’s Circular was not mandatory and it was working out modality for implementing provisions of law for denial of substantive rights, use of the same cannot be made - Follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... avail the benefit of abatement as there is no proper declaration on each consignment. 5. Ld.Counsel would draw our attention to the factual position that they have discharged Service Tax liability on 25% of the amount paid has been verified by the authority and brings to our notice a letter written by a Superintendent, in charge of the appellants factory. Subsequently, he would also submit that for the period upto 01.03.2008, discharge of Service Tax liability on the 25% of the amount of freight paid is correct position of law as has been decided by Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of M/s Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd - 2012 (27) STR 127 (Guj.) on an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order the Tribunal as reported at 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ( hereinafter referred to as Act ) proposing the following questions of law : 1. Whether the Tribunal committed error in interpreting the provisions of Section 37 about binding effect of Circular issued by C.B.E. C. for availing benefit of exemption notification ? 2. Whether Tribunal committed error in coming to the conclusion that conditions imposed by a Circular for availing exemption is mandatory ? 3. Whether the CESTAT, WZB, Ahmedabad is justified in considering the general declarations given by the GTA (which are not on consignment notes) and confirming the view of Commissioner, Service Tax, Ahmedabad regarding dropping the demand of Service Tax under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts, use of the same cannot be made. Tribunal has dealt with this issue as follows: The respondents are paying the service tax as per the reverse charge mechanism and the relevant notification whereby the service receiver is liable to pay the tax. The question to be decided is that how exactly it should be determined as to whether the conditions are fulfilled. The Board had clarified that the endorsement has to be made on the consignment note. Further, we have to take note of the fact that the notification, as such, does not stipulate any such condition. Notification requiring the receiver of the service to pay the tax also does not stipulate any such condition. Therefore, the requirements prescribed by the Board as per circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in 2008 (10) S.T.R. 201. Counsel for the petitioner candidly stated that above decision of the Tribunal was not challenged. In addition to above, we also perused the reasoning of the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal in the impugned orders. Issues are purely questions of fact and no substantial questions of law are arising. The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed. 6. Having considered identical questions proposed earlier for consideration, the same were not entertained and therefore in the present Tax Appeal preferred by the Revenue. With no other and further materials having came on record, adjudication and conclusion cannot be different than as was done earlier, this Tax Appeal also requires dismissal and according ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
