2013 (1) TMI 353

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....     Whether the Tribunal committed error in interpreting the provisions of Section 37 about binding effect of Circular issued by C.B.E. & C. for availing benefit of exemption notification ? 2.     Whether Tribunal committed error in coming to the conclusion that conditions imposed by a Circular for availing exemption is mandatory ? 3.     Whether the CESTAT, WZB, Ahmedabad is justified in considering the 'general declarations' given by the GTA (which are not on consignment notes) and confirming the view of Commissioner, Service Tax, Ahmedabad regarding dropping the demand of Service Tax under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the period from  27-7-2005 to March, 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the same cannot be made. Tribunal has dealt with this issue as follows : "The respondents are paying the service tax as per the reverse charge mechanism and the relevant notification whereby the service receiver is liable to pay the tax. The question to be decided is that how exactly it should be determined as to whether the conditions are fulfilled. The Board had clarified that the endorsement has to be made on the consignment note. Further, we have to take note of the fact that the notification, as such, does not stipulate any such condition. Notification requiring the receiver of the service to pay the tax also does not stipulate any such condition. Therefore, the requirements prescribed by the Board as per circular cannot be mandatory....