https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766080 CESTAT Chennai set aside service tax demand on GTA services for April 2008-March 2013 period. The appellant provided services to companies registered under Companies Act, 1956, with invoices clearly stating service tax liability would be paid by consignor/consignee. The adjudicating authority erred in confirming demand merely because recipient companies didn't respond to DGCEI letters. Under law, service tax liability on GTA services shifts to specified entities/recipients, not service provider. Demand related to bad debts was dropped based on chartered accountant's certificate. Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were set aside, but delay penalty of Rs.14,200 and Section 77 penalty of Rs.10,000 were upheld. Appeal disposed favorably for appellant. en-us Fri, 07 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Feb 2025 08:10:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766080 CESTAT Chennai set aside service tax demand on GTA services for April 2008-March 2013 period. The appellant provided services to companies registered under Companies Act, 1956, with invoices clearly stating service tax liability would be paid by consignor/consignee. The adjudicating authority erred in confirming demand merely because recipient companies didn't respond to DGCEI letters. Under law, service tax liability on GTA services shifts to specified entities/recipients, not service provider. Demand related to bad debts was dropped based on chartered accountant's certificate. Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were set aside, but delay penalty of Rs.14,200 and Section 77 penalty of Rs.10,000 were upheld. Appeal disposed favorably for appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 07 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766080