GTA abatement cannot be denied for missing declarations where substantive exemption conditions are otherwise satisfied.

Goods Transport Agency recipients were held entitled to the 75% abatement under Notification No. 32/2004-ST where the substantive conditions for the benefit were satisfied, even though declarations from all consignment note issuers regarding non-availment of CENVAT credit were not obtained. The prescribed declaration requirement was treated as a procedural condition that was not practically capable of compliance by the recipient and could not be used to defeat the exemption benefit. The stated position followed earlier Tribunal decisions and affirmed that denial of abatement on this ground was not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to abatement of 75% in respect of Goods Transport Agency services under Notification No. 32/2004-ST despite not obtaining declarations from all consignment note issuers regarding non-availment of CENVAT credit.

Analysis: The issue had already been settled in favour of assessees in earlier Tribunal decisions. The condition requiring declarations from the GTA was held to be incapable of practical compliance by the recipient of service, and the benefit of abatement could not be denied on that ground. The reasoning applied consistently that procedural compliance expected from the service provider could not be used to defeat the recipient's entitlement where the substantive conditions for abatement were satisfied.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the abatement and the denial of the benefit was not sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: A recipient of Goods Transport Agency service cannot be denied statutory abatement merely because the prescribed declaration from the service provider was not practically obtainable, where the substantive conditions for the exemption benefit are otherwise satisfied.

---