2015 (12) TMI 1604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that: - The issue herein has been squarely decided in favour of the appellant in earlier appeal between the parties in the case M/s. Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Versus CCE. Lucknow [2014 (5) TMI 138 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], wherein under same facts and circumstances deciding in favour of the appellant, this Tribunal held when the transporter did not issue consignment notes or GRs or challans or any doc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e by the farmer to the sugar mill. Thus, we hold that the actual recipient of the transportation service is the farmer and not the sugar mill, when admittedly transport cost has been recovered from the price of the sugarcane payable to the farmer. In view of this matter, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order - decided in favor of appellant-assessee. - ST/252/2010 - Final Order No. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 014 (34) S.T.R. 850 (Tri. - Del.), wherein under same facts and circumstances deciding in favour of the appellant, this Tribunal held when the transporter did not issue consignment notes or GRs or challans or any documents containing the particulars, in Explanation to Rule 4B of Service Tax Rules, 1994, the transporters cannot be called Goods Transport Agency and, hence, in the appellant s case th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X