Service tax demand on GTA services failed where the same liability had already been settled and the later notice was time-barred.

Service tax demand and penalties for GTA services could not be sustained where an earlier show cause notice for the same period and amount had already been decided in favour of the assessee, and the Revenue could not reopen the settled liability by issuing a fresh notice. The Tribunal also noted the limitation objection, including that the later notice was issued beyond the maximum permissible period. On these facts, the demand and penalties were held unsustainable, the impugned order was set aside, and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the service tax demand and penalties for GTA services could be sustained when earlier proceedings for the same period and amount had already been set aside, and the later notice was issued beyond the permissible limitation period.

Analysis: The demand was founded on the retrospective insertion of Section 71A and the alleged failure to file the prescribed return and obtain registration. However, the record showed that an earlier show cause notice for the same period and amount had already been adjudicated in favour of the assessee by the appellate authority. Once the earlier proceedings concerning the same demand had been settled, the Revenue could not reopen the matter by issuing a fresh notice for the same liability. The Tribunal also noted the objection on limitation, including that the notice was issued after the maximum permissible period.

Conclusion: The demand and penalties were unsustainable, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the assessee.

---