TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice Tax liability on the appellant sugarcane mills, as they have not received the service from a Goods Transport Agency. In the instant case also the Respondent have pleaded that there was no issuance of any consignment notes by the transporters and they cannot be stated to have received GTA services to attract Service Tax liability on RCM basis. The said plea was also taken by the Respondent in their reply to the Show Cause Notice. However the Ld. Adjudicating authority has decided the matter on the ground that the Respondent cannot be stated to be the recipient of transport services. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Service Tax Appeal No.2585 of 2011 And Service Tax Cross Objection No.30050 of 2020 - FINAL ORDER NO. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ords. 3. We find that the issue whether the Respondents can be termed recipient of GTA services in such cases has been decided by the Tribunal in the case of NANDGANJ SIHORI SUGAR CO. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., LUCKNOW [2014 (34) S.T.R. 850 (Tri. - Del.)] wherein on similar grounds it was held as- 5. The appellant incurred expenditure on transportation of sugarcane from the cane collection centers to their sugarcane mills and these charges were adjusted against the payment for sugarcane made to the farmers. The point of dispute is as to whether the transporters are Goods Transport Agency as defined under Section 65(50b) of the Finance Act, 1994 and whether the appellant as recipient of the service provided by the transporte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carriage, which is serially numbered and contains the name of consignor and consignee, registration number of the goods carriage in which goods are transported, details of goods transported, details of the place of origin and destination, person liable for paying Service Tax whether consignor, consignee or Goods Transport Agency. Thus mere transportation of the goods in a Motor Vehicle is not the service provided by a Goods Transport Agency. A Goods Transport Agency in terms of its definition under Section 65(50b) provides service in relation to transportation of goods under a consignment note which should have the particulars as prescribed in explanation to Rule 4B. In the present case admittedly no consignment notes have been issued. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sugarcane mills, as they have not received the service from a Goods Transport Agency. In view of this the impugned orders are not sustainable and the same are set aside. The appeals filed by M/s. Nandganj and M/s. Bajpur are allowed. As regards the Revenue s appeal, since it has been held that there is no Service Tax liability of the Appellants, there would be no merit in it and the same is dismissed. 4. We find that in the instant case also the Respondent have pleaded that there was no issuance of any consignment notes by the transporters and they cannot be stated to have received GTA services to attract Service Tax liability on RCM basis. The said plea was also taken by the Respondent in their reply to the Show Cause Notice. However ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
