9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 nor availed benefit of the Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 28.06.2003 nor they are going to avail the benefit in future against the invoices issued to the service recipient. On perusal of and a scrutiny of the document submitted by the appellant we are convince that substantive compliance of the conditions provided under Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 28.06.2003 as well as Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 has been made by the appellant and therefore the benefit of abetment 75% of the transportation charges cannot be denied to them. As decided in M/S EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX, BOLPUR [ 2012 (10) TMI 492 - CESTAT KOLKATA] in absence of any particular format prescribed under the respective notifications, the department insisting for declaration on each consignment note for allowing the abatement under the said Notifications is unsustainable in law. In these circumstances the declarations filed by the Goods Transport Agencies (GTA) in their letter-heads or in the respective payment bills certifying that they have not availed Cenvat credit on inputs or capital goods nor availed the benefit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Goods Transport Agency Service . 3.1 The department during the course of the audit has entertained a view that the appellant had availed averment of 75% of freight value under Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 and 1/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006 and thus the appellant had paid service tax on the 25% value of the freight charges paid by them to various transporters. The department is of the view that on verification of consignment notes issued by the Goods Transport Agency has revealed that the Goods Transport Agency have not given declaration on consignment notes to the effect of non-availment of Cenvat etc. On the basis of these premises, a show cause notice dated 01.04.2010 came to be issued which was adjudicated by the impugned order-in-original dated 29th January, 2014, all the charges as invoked in the show cause notice has been confirmed by the learned Adjudicating Authority. 4. The learned advocate appeared for the appellant has submitted that it is a matter of record that the appellant have discharged Service Tax liability on the Goods Transport Agency Service received by them on reverse charge basis has provided under the provisions of Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the record of the appeal. We take note of the fact that the certified photocopies as well as declaration from the service providers namely various transport agencies such as M/s. Maruti Logistics etc. it has categorically been provided by the appellant during the course of hearing to the learned adjudicating authority that the service provider transport agency has declared that they have neither availed any credit of the duty paid on import or capital goods used for providing such taxable services under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 nor availed benefit of the Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 28.06.2003 nor they are going to avail the benefit in future against the invoices issued to the service recipient. On perusal of and a scrutiny of the document submitted by the appellant we are convince that substantive compliance of the conditions provided under Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 28.06.2003 as well as Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 has been made by the appellant and therefore the benefit of abetment 75% of the transportation charges cannot be denied to them. 6.1 We also take shelter of this tribunal s decision in case of Eastern Coalfields Freights Limited Vs. Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th. We find that taking note of the difficulties experienced by the department as well as the assesses/the Board has issued further clarification on 21-8-2008. It is clarified as follows: The matter has been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in partial modification of the instructions contained in Circular No. B1/6/2005-TRU, dated 27-7-2005 it is clarified that the benefit of availment of abatement may also be extended in past cases if the taxpayers produce a general declaration from the GTA to the effect that neither credit on input or capital goods used for the provision of service has been taken not the benefit of notification No. 12/2003-5.T. has been taken by them. Further we find that the issue of abatement from the taxable value under Notification No. 32/2004-S.T. or 1/2006-S.T. is no more res integra. This Tribunal in the case of Paliwal Home Furnishings [2011 (22) S.T.R. 531 (Tri. Del.)] had observed that the Notification Nos. 32/2004-S.T. and 1/2006-S.T. do not prescribe any format in which the certificate to the effect of non-availment of Cenvat Credit on inputs or capital goods and benefit of Notification No. 12/2003, to be furnished. Hence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
