TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g sugarcane from Cane Collection Centers to sugar mills and presenting bills for such service, squarely satisfy the requirement of Rule 2(d)(v) read with Section 65(50b) of Finance Act, 1994 - the transporters in the present case are clearly covered by the definition of Goods Transport Agency hence Assessees are liable to pay service tax being within the definition of person liable to pay service tax under Rule 2(d)(v). The only factual difference between the decision of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court and the case on hand are, as noted by the Hon ble High Court, that the sugarcane was transferred to sugar mills by individual truck owners who would charge for such transportation, by presenting bills fortnightly, whereas, here in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing that the same was in the first place time-barred, secondly the tractor with trailer which was used for transportation belonged to farmers, the same was not a commercial vehicle and that the farmers were not the Goods Transport Agency. In the adjudication, however, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand along with applicable interest and penalties also, against which the appellant preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority and the First Appellate Authority, vide the impugned Order-in-Appeal, rejected the appellant s appeal insofar as demand was concerned but, however, granted relief only to the extent of penalties imposed under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, against which the present appeal has been f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. CCE [2017-TIOL- 375-CESTAT-MUM] viii. Shri Chhatrapati SSK Ltd. Vs. CCE [2016- TIOL-2483-CESTAT-MUM] ix. Saswad Mali Sugar Factory Ltd. Vs. CCE [2017-TIOL-606-CESTAT-MUM] x. CCE Vs. Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. [2018- TIOL-966-CESTAT-DEL] 3. Per contra, Smt. C.V. Savitha, learned Superintendent(AR) while supporting the findings of the learned lower authorities, also relied the judgment of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CCE, Lucknow Vs. Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. [2019(29) GSTL 292 (All.)]. 4. Having heard both sides and perused the orders / judgments relied on before us, we find that the appellant has contested both on merits as well as on invoking the larger period and that the Revenue has failed to ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 65(50b) of Finance Act, 1994 goods transport agency envisages rendering of service by a person in relation to transport of goods by road and issue of a consignment note by whatever name called. 9. From the above, it is clear that the tax liability will arise only upon the goods transport agency i.e., one who undertakes responsibility, in full legal sense, for the cargo despatched by it and an individual truck operator who does not accept such responsibility, is merely performing the activity of transport of goods which is not the subject of the tax. It is, of course, necessary to point out, from the history of the tax on this service, that the blanket intent to tax the operators led to widespread agitation and, conscious of the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly and jointly as assessees ) are engaged in manufacture of cane sugar and molasses. They are procuring sugarcane from farmers who deliver same at Cane Collection Centers set up by assessees. From Cane Collection Centers , sugarcane is transferred to sugar mills by individual truck owners who charge for transportation of sugarcane by presenting bills, fortnightly. The authorities of Central Excise took a view that assessees being recipient of transportation service, are required to discharge service tax liability hence initiated proceedings. Authorities took the view that assessees are Cooperative Societies and comes within the term person liable to pay service tax on services of goods transport agency availed by them for transp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le 2(d)(v). 5.5. The only factual difference between the decision of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court and the case on hand are, as noted by the Hon ble High Court, that the sugarcane was transferred to sugar mills by individual truck owners who would charge for such transportation, by presenting bills fortnightly, whereas, here in the case on hand, the agriculturists themselves are transporting the sugarcane to the factory of the appellant and hence, there was no service rendered in relation to transportation of goods by road in a goods carriage. This is because, there was actual transportation and not in relation to, as observed in the order of this Bench in Lakshminarayana Mining Co. (supra). 6. In view of the above, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
