GTA service tax abatement: transporter certificates may satisfy declaration requirements, with remand for factual verification.

Abatement under Notification No. 32/2004-ST and Notification No. 1/2006-ST for GTA services could not be denied solely because the consignment note lacked a prescribed declaration, where earlier decisions accepted transporter certificates in the absence of any mandated format. The Tribunal found that the certificates produced by the assessee required factual verification, so the abatement claim could not be finally rejected on the existing record. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the certificates and a fresh decision in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of abatement under Notification No. 32/2004-ST and Notification No. 1/2006-ST in respect of GTA services could be denied for want of a prescribed declaration in the consignment note, and whether the matter should be remanded for verification of certificates produced before the Tribunal.

Analysis: The disputed service tax demand turned on compliance with the notification conditions requiring a declaration that the GTA had not availed Cenvat credit on capital goods or the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST. The Tribunal noted that earlier decisions had held that, in the absence of any prescribed format, certificates issued by transporters could suffice. As the assessee produced such certificates before the Tribunal, the matter required factual verification by the original adjudicating authority in the light of the cited precedents.

Conclusion: The denial of abatement was not finally upheld, and the impugned order was set aside with remand for reconsideration of the certificates and fresh decision according to law.

Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained a remand for reconsideration of the abatement claim on the basis of transporter certificates, with the original demand not finally adjudicated.

---