TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 564
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd June 2005, by availing option under Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004. CBEC vide letter F.No.B1/6/2005-TRU dated 27.07.2005 clarified that a declaration by the GTA on the consignment notes issued to the effect that neither credit on inputs or capital goods used for providing said taxable service has been taken nor the benefit of Notification No.12/2003-Sorvice Tax has been taken by them, will suffice for the purpose of availment of abatement by the person liable to pay Service Tax. The department was of the view that in the instant case, the appellant had not produced the consignment notes duly endorsed by the Goods Transport Agency as above and hence was not entitled for the abatement. Therefore, a show cause notice dated 01.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e mechanism cannot be covered under Notification No.12/03-ST. 5. Ld. Assistant Commissioner (A.R.) on the other hand would submit that the general declaration given by the Roadways is only stating that the Roadways have not availed the cenvat credit of capital goods of inputs. It is his submission that the said goods transport agency service provider has not given any certificate regarding non utilisation or availing the benefit of the Notification No.12/03-ST is the finding of the appellate authority, it is in the absence of such certificate, credit has been correctly availed. It is his submission that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hari Chand Shri Gopal 2010 (260) ELT 3 (S.C.), has held that the conditions of notification should be co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m availing the notification benefit if it had taken credit of duty paid on goods sold in the course of provision of GTA service. Thus, she submits that M/s. IOCL had discharged service tax under the category GTA service in terms of Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 as a recipient and deemed provider of service. The restriction laid down in the Notification did not apply to it. She relies on the finding of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot v. Sunhill Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. - 2008 (9) S.T.R. 530 (Tri. -Ahmd.), wherein the Tribunal has held as under : - 5.2 In respect of the Goods Transport Agency services, the service provider is undoubtedly goods transport agency. However, the liability to pay tax in certai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is entitled to the abatement denied to it as per the impugned order as per the decision in the case of Sunhill Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 9. I also find that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. (supra) (wherein I was one of the Member) has on an identical issue came to the conclusion that the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of 75% of the abatement if the transport agency has given a general declaration. 10. Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (supra) on an identical issue has settled the law, and relevant paragraphs are respectfully reproduced. 4. Tribunal also held that the requirements prescribed by the Boards Circular was not mandatory and it was wor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng manner : Department is in appeal against the judgment of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal for short), dated 6-8-2009 by which appeal of the department came to be dismissed. The issue pertains to filing of general declaration instead of consignment-wise declaration by assessee declaring that cenvat credit is not available. Against the decision of the competent authority dated 7-1-2009, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that assessee is eligible to claim the benefit of exemption on the ground that procedure was substantially complied with as provided in Notification dated 3-12-2004. The Tribunal concurred with the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the revenues ....