Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 387 - AT - Service TaxSEZ unit - GTA Service - the goods are sold by the appellant in Domestic Tariff Area (DTA). The appellant only kept the goods transported to the DTA buyers after charging certain freight amount - Case of Revenue is that appellant have been engaged in providing the services of transport of goods by road to their customers at the time of removal of their finished goods in DTA - Whether the appellant can be called as the goods transport agency as defined under Section 50 (b) of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 or not? - Held that:- To be called ‘Goods Transport Agency’ a person should fulfil two conditions, namely, he should provide service in relation to transport of goods by road and secondly should issue consignment note, by whatever name called. In this present case, admittedly, no consignment note was issued by the goods transporter. The slip issued by the appellant as recipient of service is taken by the adjudicating authority with such activity of transport to bring in tax liability. Such an attempt is beyond the scope of law. In cases where admittedly no consignment notes have been issued, the said transporter cannot be called Goods Transport Agency - the appellant do not fall under the definition of Goods Transport Agency, whose services are taxable in view of Section 65 (zzb) of the Finance Act. Scope of SCN - Held that:- In the present case perusal of show cause notice dated 05.04.2011 shows that the appellant has been fastened with the liability of Service Tax on the presumption of it being GTA. The show cause notice is absolutely silent about the appellant to not to be entitled for any exemption under Special Economic Zone Act, 2005 - Keeping in view that the show cause notice is the foundation of demand, the proceedings on the lines contrary to the allegations therein deserves rejection. The appellant being a unit in special economic zone shall be entitled for exemption in furtherance of Section 26 (1) (e) read with Section 26 (2) of SEZ Act and read with Rule 31 of SEZ Rules, 2006. Whether SCN is time barred? - Held that:- The SCN dated 05.04.2011 has been issued to the appellant calling him upon to discharge the service tax liability for the period from October 2005 to September, 2008. The entire demand is beyond the normal period of limitation of one year and as such being barred by limitation of such proviso to Section 73 (1) of Finance Act, 1994 is applicable to the present case. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|