Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2018 (5) TMI 1131

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs. 34,42,705/- along with interest thereon and penalty under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 as confirmed by the original authority. The dispute pertains to the period from 2006-07 to 2010-11 and arose from the discrepancy between the expenses of Rs. 5,36,27,945 shown in the balance sheet as transportation charges whereas the gross value as recipient of 'goods transport agency services' was recorded in ST-3 returns as Rs. 3,09,83,021/- According to the respondent, it has consistently contended that these were incurred for imports and exports. The impugned order set aside the demand on the ground that original authority had failed to satisfy itself that activity conformed to the description of the taxable service in section 65 of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tribunal in Bhima Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune -III [2016 (41) STR 438 (Tri-Mumbai)]. 5. It is not in dispute that the respondent had availed services of M/s VA Enterprises and others, but, admittedly, did not discharge service tax liability on the consideration paid over to these transporters. It is the contention of the respondent that they are not liable to tax on such consideration for the various reasons adverted to bv the Learned Counsel. 6. That goods had been transported and, that too, by road is not in doubt. The question that arises for consideration is whether the respondent had availed the service of 'goods transport agency' within the meaning of Finance Act, 1994. There is no d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iability of the recipient does not get erased. 8. It is not the transportation of goods by road that is subject to tax but the services rendered by a goods transport agency in relation to the 'transportation of goods by toad and road transport agency tasked with responsibilities that others connected with road transport are not, with consignment note being the point of difference. There is also no doubt that rule 4B of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 lays down the contents of a consignment note. 9. Revenue relies upon the invoices or monthly bills raised by M/s VB Enterprises. An invoice, notwithstanding adequacy of details thereon is no substitute for a consignment note. An invoice cerates liability of debt on the part of the recipie....