9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mption notification 34/2004 is concerned, there is nothing on record to show that appellant is entitled to the benefit of this exemption notification. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - APPEAL No. ST/1417/2010 - A/31375/2018 - Dated:- 2-11-2018 - Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And Mr. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) None for the Appellant. Shri A.V.L.N. Chary, Superintendent /AR for the Respondent. ORDER Per: Mr. P.V. Subba Rao 1. This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 16/2010(T) ST, dated 30.04.2010. None appeared for the appellant despite notice. A letter has been sent by the Counsel requesting that the matter may be decided on merits. The facts of the case are tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany vs. CST, Bangalore [2009(16)STR 691]. Therefore, no service tax is payable in respect of the services rendered by the private truck operators. (b) They have not incurred the transportation charges because the cane growers are required to deliver the cane at the factory gate. They have made advance payments of the transport charges on behalf of the crane growers and this amount would be adjusted against the final cost of the cane. (c) The show cause notice is time barred as it was issued invoking the extended period of time and no suppression of facts can be alleged because they furnished all details in the income tax returns. 2. Ld. DR reiterates the arguments made in the Order-in-Appeal and argued that service tax is payable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is liable to pay service tax on GTA services. The first contention of the appellant is that sugar cane was delivered at their factory gate and they are not incurring any transportation charges. However, examination of the records of the appellant clearly showed that they had not only incurred the charges towards transportation of sugar cane but also of other inputs and materials. These details having been shown in the accounts, we find no force in the argument of the appellant that they have not incurred transportation charges. We also do not find any force in the arguments of the appellant that the transportation charges which they paid were only a form of advance to the cane growers because the accounts do not say so. The case in questio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l concern , the Finance Act substituted any person who provides and thus widened the scope of the definition as applicable to all persons irrespective of it being an individual or a commercial concern. 17. Section 65(50b) of the Finance Act, 1994 defines the Goods Transport Agency as any person who provides service in relation to transport of goods by the road and issuing consignment note, by whatever name called. 18. The expression any person is not defined under the Act. Section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act defines person , as including any company or association or body of individual whether incorporated or not. The thrust of the definition is that it includes every person engaged in an activity providing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
