https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235435 Service tax on GTA services already discharged by the transporter could not be demanded again from the recipient, as the matter was covered by settled precedent and the recipient was also entitled to CENVAT credit treatment. The same service therefore could not be subjected to a second tax demand on the recipient. On limitation, the extended period was unavailable because tax had been paid and there was no indication of intent to evade. The demand was held unsustainable and the stay application did not survive independently. en-us Thu, 13 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Jul 2013 10:25:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235435 Service tax on GTA services already discharged by the transporter could not be demanded again from the recipient, as the matter was covered by settled precedent and the recipient was also entitled to CENVAT credit treatment. The same service therefore could not be subjected to a second tax demand on the recipient. On limitation, the extended period was unavailable because tax had been paid and there was no indication of intent to evade. The demand was held unsustainable and the stay application did not survive independently. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 13 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235435