https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465408 The dominant issue was whether shifting of household goods involving road transportation with packing/unpacking/loading/unloading was classifiable as GTA service or cargo handling service. Applying s.65(50b), the Tribunal held that the principal objective was transportation; ancillary handling activities did not alter classification where a consignment note was issued and the provider was registered as GTA, consistent with CBEC Circular No.104/07/2008-ST. Consequently, the service was held classifiable as GTA and not cargo handling, defeating the proposed demands on that basis. On the quantified tax liability for surplus/surcharge collections and denial of abatement, the Tribunal accepted the original authority's appreciation of records and the certified computation of actual service tax liability, finding no perversity in dropping the proposed demands. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 08 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 May 2026 14:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465408 The dominant issue was whether shifting of household goods involving road transportation with packing/unpacking/loading/unloading was classifiable as GTA service or cargo handling service. Applying s.65(50b), the Tribunal held that the principal objective was transportation; ancillary handling activities did not alter classification where a consignment note was issued and the provider was registered as GTA, consistent with CBEC Circular No.104/07/2008-ST. Consequently, the service was held classifiable as GTA and not cargo handling, defeating the proposed demands on that basis. On the quantified tax liability for surplus/surcharge collections and denial of abatement, the Tribunal accepted the original authority's appreciation of records and the certified computation of actual service tax liability, finding no perversity in dropping the proposed demands. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 08 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465408