Duplicate service tax recovery on GTA services is unsustainable when the tax has already been paid by the transporters.

Recipient liability for GTA service tax under Notification No. 36/2004-S.T. could not sustain a second demand where the transporters had already paid tax on the same services. The record showed that the tax had already reached the Revenue and that fact was not disputed, so confirming the same liability again against the recipient would amount to duplicative recovery. On that basis, the confirmed demand and equal penalty were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether service tax demand and equal penalty could be confirmed against the recipient of GTA services when the tax on those services had already been paid by the transporters.

Analysis: The appeal turned on the effect of Notification No. 36/2004-S.T. dated 31-12-2004, under which the recipient of GTA services was treated as liable to pay tax. The record, however, showed that the service tax on the very same transport services had already been deposited by the transporters, and this factual position was not disputed in the revision order. In those circumstances, a second recovery from the appellant would amount to duplicative collection of the same tax amount.

Conclusion: The demand and penalty were not sustainable, and the order confirming them was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The assessee was relieved of the confirmed tax and equal penalty because the tax attributable to the GTA services had already reached the Revenue through the transporters.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the tax on a service has already been discharged and received by the Revenue, a second confirmation of the same tax from another person for the same liability is unwarranted.

---