2023 (7) TMI 1619 - AT - Service Tax

Goods Transport Agency GTA service tax demand under reverse charge quashed for lack of consignment note evidence

The Tribunal examined the demand of service tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism on alleged Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services received by the appellant. ... Liability of appellant to pay service tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) - appellant have received Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service - Appellant took a specific plea that Revenue has not lead any evidence that the Appellant has received the GTA service - HELD THAT:- Upon considering the facts and circumstances and upon perusing the records, it is found that there is no finding to the contrary by the Adjudicating Authority that the service providers were Goods Transport Agents and have issued consignment note. In this view of the matter, it is found that the demand is not maintainable. The impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed. The appeal concerned liability to Service Tax under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) on alleged receipt of Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services. Pursuant to audit, a show cause notice dated 30.09.2010 demanded Rs. 1,41,230/- (including cess), interest, and penalties for 2005-06 to 2009-10, relying solely on balance sheet debits under 'Packaging and Forwarding expenses' with sub-heads 'Freight and Forwarding' and 'Carriage Outward.' The appellant specifically contended that the Department had led no evidence that GTA services were received, asserting that transport was arranged through individual truck owners who were not GTA and who did not issue any consignment note. The statutory definition of 'GTA' requires a commercial concern that 'issues consignment note, by whatever name called.' Finding no contrary evidence or finding that service providers were GTA or issued consignment notes, the Tribunal held the demand unsustainable, set aside the impugned order, and allowed consequential relief.