GTA service tax pre-deposit waived where transporter was neither consignor nor consignee and notification did not apply.

Transportation of iron ore through the appellant's own vehicles, and through hired vehicles supported by consignment notes and transport bills at predetermined rates, was treated as not bringing the appellant within the categories of consignor or consignee. On those facts, Notification No. 32/2004 was held inapplicable to shift the GTA tax burden to the service recipient. The absence of a clear one-to-one correlation between each consignment note, receipt, and tax payment did not defeat the appellant's prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was liable to make pre-deposit in the service tax dispute arising from transportation of iron ore under goods transport agency service.

Analysis: The transportation activity was undertaken through the appellant's own vehicles and, when hired vehicles were used, the transporters issued consignment notes and the appellant raised transport bills on predetermined rates. The Tribunal found that in such circumstances the appellant could not be treated as either consignor or consignee. It further held that Notification No. 32/2004, which places the tax burden on the receiver of service in respect of GTA service, was not applicable on the facts. The absence of a demonstrated correlation between each consignment note, the amount received, and the tax paid by the consignee did not alter the basic position for the purpose of pre-deposit.

Conclusion: The appellant made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit and for stay against recovery during the pendency of the appeal.

---