TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consignment note, but merely on general declaration from GTA - In the instant case, from the facts it is seen that the appellants have obtained such undertaking letters from the concerned transporters. This being so, the confirmation of demand is in contradiction to the clarifications of CBEC themselves vide circular dated 21.08.2008 - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. ST/661/2009 - Final Order No. A/31915/2017 - Dated:- 15-11-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member(Technical) Shri M.V.S. Prasad, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R. Srinivasa, Superintendent, AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order Per : Madhu Mohan Damodhar ] M/s Chan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovided by Goods Transport Agency (GTA) to 25% of the gross amount charged. This notification was rescinded w.e.f. 01.03.2006 by notification No. 2/2006-ST, dated 01.03.2006. However, the exemption allowing for discharge of service tax liability only on 25% of the gross amount charged by the GTA was continued by notification No. 01/2006-ST, dated 01.03.2006, without any conditions on declaration etc. Even this was amended vide notification No. 13/2008, dated 01.03.2008, which while maintaining 25% cap of gross amount charged for the purpose of discharge of service tax liability, changed the focus of the exemption from taxable service provided by a Goods Transport Agency to a customer to taxable service provided by Goods Transport Agency to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduced below: F. No. 137/154/2008-CX. 4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise and Customs Dated August, 21, 2008 Subject : Service Tax GTA Certain further clarification in respect to clarification issued vide circular No. 5/1/2007-ST, dated 12.03.2007 regarding exemption under notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 reg. 01. It may be recalled that a dispute had arisen whether or not the persons other than Goods Transport Agents (herein after called the GTA) i.e. consignor or consignee, whosoever pays tax under reverse charge method under the provision of the Service Tax Rules is also eligible for abatement of 75% under the notification No.32/2004-S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the Board Circular reached the field formations. This has been the reason for certain notices still remaining pending. 04. The matter has been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and 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 service has been taken nor the benefit of notification No.12/2003-ST has been taken by them. 05. The past cases may be decided accordingly. 06. This issues with the approval of the Member (Service Tax). 7. On appreciating the aforesaid chronological event ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct or expand the amplitude of an exemption notification nor can they add/subtract conditionalities thereto/ there from. e) In a landmark judgment, Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Inter Continental (India) [2008(226) E.L.T 16(S.C), upheld the judgment of Hon ble High Court of Gujarat holding that the department by issuing a circular subsequent to the notification could not add new conditions to the notification thereby restricting the scope of exemption notification or whittling it down. f) In the case of Mutual Industries Limited vs. CCE ST, Vapi, in the final order no. A/85116-85117/16/STB, dated 30.10.2015, the Tribunal, relying upon earlier CESTAT decisions, held that the assessee where liable to pay se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
