https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270100 Service tax could not be fastened on the recipient of Goods Transport Operator services for the relevant period because the charging and machinery provisions did not authorise shifting liability to the recipient, and the rule provisions treating the recipient as tax collector were inconsistent with the Act and ultra vires. Earlier binding precedents were followed, and the validating amendments in the Finance Act, 2000 did not alter that result on the material before the Tribunal. The demand and show-cause notice were therefore unsustainable, and the amount already deposited was directed to be refundable subject to verification of arithmetical accuracy. en-us Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Dec 2015 01:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270100 Service tax could not be fastened on the recipient of Goods Transport Operator services for the relevant period because the charging and machinery provisions did not authorise shifting liability to the recipient, and the rule provisions treating the recipient as tax collector were inconsistent with the Act and ultra vires. Earlier binding precedents were followed, and the validating amendments in the Finance Act, 2000 did not alter that result on the material before the Tribunal. The demand and show-cause notice were therefore unsustainable, and the amount already deposited was directed to be refundable subject to verification of arithmetical accuracy. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270100