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 / RSS

2020 (3) TMI 846

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dings - the latter impugning the order in which proceedings initiated against M/s V Trans Ltd, the parent entity of the former, was dropped. However, the issue in dispute is identical and, hence, we take them up for disposal together. 2. The appeal of M/s V Express, a division of M/s V Trans Ltd, impugns the chronologically earlier of the two orders and narration of facts therein should suffice for both insofar as the common issue is concerned. In addition, there are two demands of Rs. 7,62,168 and Rs. 2,15,772 representing recoveries made from the recipients of taxable service which, even if not due was, nevertheless, required to be deposited with the exchequer as provided for in section 73A of Finance Act, 1994. The appellant, as a 'go....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inance Act, 1994 along with interest under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994. There is no appeal by Revenue against the dropping of demand of Rs. 4,33,77,312 pertaining to the extended period of limitation or of the penalties proposed under section 76, section 77 and section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. 4. In identical proceedings against M/s V Trans Ltd, in relation to the rendering of 'transportation of goods by road service' which, according to service tax authorities, was, in reality, 'courier agency service', demand of Rs. 40,87,43,002, as differential tax for the period from 1st October 2006 to 31st March 2011, was proposed in show cause notice dated 28th of March 2012 and for every year thereafter in four different show cause notices de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Excise & Customs, negates the discharge of tax liability under an inappropriate category of provider of service. Among the submissions are those pertaining to the scope for expansion of legislative intent and the meaning of 'courier' service. In our opinion, we do not have to delve into all of these as the legislative intent in taxing two separate, and distinctly mutually exclusive, taxable services must be enforced without let or hindrance. 7. It would appear that the Central Board of Excise & Customs was exercised over 'express cargo service' facilities, offered by certain road transporters, claiming the consequences of the peculiar system of levy put in place, owing to special circumstances, for taxing 'transportation of goods by road....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....courier agency' defined in '(33) any person engaged in the door-to-door transportation of time sensitive documents, goods or articles utilising the services of a person, either directly or indirectly to carry or a company such documents, goods or articles' places emphasis on 'door-to-door delivery' as well as the depositions of the key entities in the organisation of the service provider admitting to the delivered documents, goods or articles being 'time sensitive'. 9. The first of the two impugned orders is not convincing in the refutation of the claim of the assessees that carriage of goods or articles from door to door suffices to exclude the ambit of 'transportation of goods by road service' from such activity. Neither do....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... an inherent flaw in this logic: the rendering of 'transportation of goods by road service' cannot be bereft of the presence of the driver and would, in circumstances of door-to-door delivery, transform such activity to that of 'courier agency service' even in the ostensible absence of 'time sensitivity'. In our view, the distinction between the two taxable entries cannot be left to such vaguely founded conclusions as revealing of legislative intent. This is apparent in the contradictory viewpoints in near identical proceedings emerging from the two adjudication proceedings. 11. The history of the several circulars, as well as the proposition of the first adjudicating authority, and of Learned Authorised Representative, that 'time sensit....