Abatement under GTA exemption notification sustained when service-provider declarations proved compliance despite missing initial endorsement.

Declarations from goods transport agency service providers showing that no Cenvat credit on inputs or capital goods had been availed and that no benefit under Notification No. 12/2003-ST had been claimed were sufficient to satisfy the condition in the CBEC circular. Denial of abatement was not justified merely because the appellant had not initially produced consignment notes bearing the prescribed endorsement. The substantive eligibility condition for Notification No. 32/2004-ST was therefore met, and the service tax demand was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 for goods transport agency services on the basis of declarations from the service providers that no cenvat credit on inputs or capital goods had been availed and the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 20.06.2003 had not been claimed.

Analysis: The demand had been confirmed because the appellant did not initially produce consignment notes endorsed with the declaration contemplated by the CBEC circular. However, the appellant produced declarations from the goods transport agency service providers during adjudication showing that they had not availed cenvat credit on inputs or capital goods and had not taken the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 20.06.2003. On that basis, the condition prescribed by the CBEC circular was held to have been satisfied, and the denial of abatement was not justified.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004, and the demand was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The assessment of service tax liability under the impugned notification could not be sustained once the prescribed declarations were produced and accepted as compliance with the circular condition, resulting in relief to the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the substantive condition for an exemption or abatement notification is proved by declarations from the service provider, denial of the benefit cannot be sustained merely for want of the initial form of documentary endorsement contemplated by the administrative circular.

---