9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 940X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of stream generator and accessories for setting up Super Thermal Power Plant to NTPC at Bilaspur. The appellant imported certain goods at Visakhapatnam for ultimate supply to NTPC. The appellant awarded a work order dated 20.09.2004 to M/s Lee & Muirhead Pvt. Ltd. for the service of customs clearance and transportation of the imported machines from the port to the project site of NTPC at Sipat. M/s Lee & Muirhead in turn sub-contracted the work of transportation of the goods to M/s Essemm Logistics, Vizag, who arranged for the transportation of goods to NTPC site and issued the consignment note in the name of NTPC as consignor as well as consignee. M/s Lee & Muirhead Pvt. Ltd. also issued delivery note in the name of NTPC. 2. Revenue too ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rse the same. However, the liability for service tax payment is not on the appellant since M/s Lee & Muirhead Pvt. Ltd. was the consignor of the goods. (iii) They also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sumangalam Suitings (P) Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II - 2010 (19) STR 809 (Tri. Del.) wherein it has been held that the service tax is liable to be paid by the consignor who paid the transportation charges and not on the appellants who had engaged the transporters. 6. Ld. AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, supported the impugned order. The dispute in the present case is with reference to the liability for payment of service tax on the service of goods transport agency. The imported goods were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtnership firm registered by or under any law. From the above, it is evident that in the case of GTA service the levy of service tax has been shifted from the service provider to the person who is liable to pay freight where consignor or consignee of the goods is covered under any of the seven specified categories. From the agreement entered into between the appellant and M/s Lee & Muirhead Pvt. Ltd, we note that the latter will be entitled to the payment of Rs. 927/- per freight tonne which included Rs. 770/- for transportation and balance for other services. From this, it is evident that it is the appellant who pays freight for the transportation of the goods. In terms of the sub-contract executed with M/s Lee & Muirhead Pvt. Ltd., the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
