TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncern which) provides service in relation to transport of goods by road and issues consignment notes by whatever name called. - respondents were transporting their own goods and it can be nobodys case that even providing service to oneself is taxable. CESTAT in the case of Kesoram Spun Pipes p& Foundaries (2002 (5) TMI 3 - CEGAT, KOLKATA) observed that in the present case, the appellants have received goods directly from the suppliers of the Coke, who have themselves undertaken the deliveries of the goods at the appellants door-steps, it cannot be said that the appellants received the services of any commercial agency. - No merit in Revenue appeal - Decided against Revenue. - Application No. ST/CROSS/187/2009-CU(DB), Appeal No. ST/364/200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal Revenue has contended that while transporting the goods, the respondents were issuing challans containing the details of consignment note and therefore they were covered under the category of GTA service and that the judgement of Kesoram Spun Pipes Foundries Vs. CCE, Calcutta-IV [2006 (3) STR 57 (Tri.-Kolkatta)] referred to by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not applicable as the definition of GTA was amended with effect from 01.05.2006 as a result of which, the word commercial concern were replaced by the word person. 3. In their cross objections, respondents essentially repeated the contentions they had submitted before the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. It is not in dispute that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name called. In the present case, the respondents were transporting their own goods and it can be nobodys case that even providing service to oneself is taxable. CESTAT in the case of Kesoram Spun Pipes p Foundaries (supra) observed that in the present case, the appellants have received goods directly from the suppliers of the Coke, who have themselves undertaken the deliveries of the goods at the appellants door-steps, it cannot be said that the appellants received the services of any commercial agency. This ratio remains unaffected even if the words commercial concern are replaced by word person . 5. In the light of the analysis above, we do not find any merit in Revenues appeal and the same is therefore dismissed. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
