Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2018 (7) TMI 1668 - AT - Service Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Individual Truck Owners Liable for Service Tax under GTA Service: Appellate Tribunal Ruling The appellate tribunal upheld the liability of individual truck owners under Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service to pay service tax, ruling that they ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Individual Truck Owners Liable for Service Tax under GTA Service: Appellate Tribunal Ruling

                          The appellate tribunal upheld the liability of individual truck owners under Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service to pay service tax, ruling that they were not exempt from service tax under Notification No. 34/2004-ST if the freight charges exceeded the specified limit per trip. The tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that individual truck owners providing transport services fell under GTA service classification and were liable to pay service tax as per the Finance Act, 1994. The judgment clarified the interpretation of the notification and affirmed the applicability of exemption limits in determining service tax obligations for consignments transported by individual truck owners.




                          Issues:
                          - Interpretation of Notification No. 34/2004-ST dated 3.12.2004 regarding service tax liability under Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service.
                          - Applicability of exemption limits for payment of service tax on consignments transported by individual truck owners.
                          - Classification of individual truck owners under GTA service and liability to pay service tax.
                          - Entitlement of benefit under Notification No. 34/2004-ST dated 3.12.2004 for exemption from service tax.

                          Analysis:
                          1. Interpretation of Notification No. 34/2004-ST: The appeal involved a dispute over the interpretation of Notification No. 34/2004-ST dated 3.12.2004 concerning the service tax liability under GTA service. The appellant contended that they were entitled to the benefit of the notification, which exempts service tax if the gross amount charged on consignments does not exceed a certain limit. However, the Revenue argued that the notification's exemption limits were not applicable to the appellant's case due to specific conditions related to individual consignments and total freight charges per trip.

                          2. Applicability of Exemption Limits: The Revenue issued a show-cause notice demanding service tax under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, based on their interpretation of the notification. The appellant argued that they had correctly discharged their service tax liability under GTA charges on a reverse charge basis for consignments where freight charges exceeded the specified limit per trip. The appellant relied on previous tribunal decisions to support their claim that service tax was not payable under GTA service in similar situations involving individual truck owners.

                          3. Classification under GTA Service: The Revenue, supported by the judgment of the Madras High Court, contended that any person providing transport services by road falls under the category of GTA service and is liable to pay service tax. The court's interpretation emphasized that the definition of "goods transport agency" includes any person providing transport services by road, irrespective of individual ownership. This interpretation led to the conclusion that individual truck owners providing transport services were classifiable under GTA service and thus subject to service tax.

                          4. Entitlement of Exemption Benefit: The appellate tribunal, considering the Madras High Court judgment, held that the appellant's case fell under Clause (ii) of Notification No. 34/2004-ST dated 3.12.2004. Consequently, the appellants were required to pay service tax on freight charges exceeding the specified limit per trip. The tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the appellant's argument regarding the non-applicability of GTA service to individual truck owners was legally unsustainable, and upheld the liability to pay service tax as per the Finance Act, 1994.

                          In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of Notification No. 34/2004-ST, affirmed the liability of individual truck owners under GTA service for service tax payment, and emphasized the applicability of exemption limits for determining service tax obligations in cases involving consignments transported by individual truck owners.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found