AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 136
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994, which are relating to the period 2005. 2.1. Shri M.S. Nagaraja, learned advocate appearing for the assessee-appellant would request for considering the appellant's appeal first since the penalty question in the Revenue's appeal would be consequential. His request was accepted and he was heard. His contentions, briefly, are as under:- i. The assessee is engaged in extraction, processing and export of iron ore; they had exported the entire quantity of iron ore produced/manufactured. ii. They had availed the services of private transports for removal and transportation of iron ore, ore burden from their mines to the plant. For which, they had paid certain amounts t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mafatlal Industries Vs. UOI [1997(89) ELT 247 (SC). He would also submit that the amount which was paid during the investigation would take the colour of a deposit and hence not a duty or tax and therefore limitation under Section 11B would not apply and in this regard, he would rely on the following decisions:- i. CC Vs. Motorala India Pvt. Ltd. [2006(206) ELT 370 (Tri. Bang.)] ii. Laxmi Board & Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bombay [2007(208) ELT 384 (Tri. Mum.)] 2.4. On merits, learned advocate would submit that they had engaged the services of individual truck owners for transportation of iron ore right from mine head up to the ports for shipment and therefore the same ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C, Guntur Vs. Kanaka Durga Agro Oil Products Pvt. Ltd. [2009(15) STR 399 (Tri. Bang.)] iv. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur [2017(47) STR 93 (Tri. Del.)] v. Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Lucknow [2014(34) STR 850 (Tri. Del.)] vi. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. Vs. CCE, Kolhapur [2018(10) GSTL 80 (Tri. Mum.)] vii. Bellary Iron Ores Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Belgaum [2010(18) STR 406 (Tri. Bang.)] viii. Mafatlal Industries Ltd. Vs. UOI [1997(89) ELT 247 (SC)] ix. CCE, Coimbatore Vs. Pricol Ltd. [2015(39) STR 190 (Mad.)] x. CST, Chennai Vs. Wardes Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. [2011(22) STR 274 (Mad.) xi. CC, Bangalore Vs. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. [2006(206) ELT 370 (T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....& quantity of the goods transported, Loading time, contractor name, place of loading & unloading station, signature of the contractor / representative etc." By these, learned AR would contend that the arrangement of non-issue / non-maintenance of documents in respect of movement of goods out of the mines and issue of pay slips for movement of goods from mines to railway yard, pay slips were maintained and hence the same would establish that the assessee did issue consignment note. He would refer to Section 65(23), Section 65(50b) and Rule 4B of Service Tax Rules, 1994: that GTA under Section 60(50b) would mean any person who provides service in relation to transport of goods by road and issues consignment note by whatever name called; that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... itself would not result in any other thing other than a consignment note. Secondly, even the definition of GTA as per Section 65(50b) would mean any person, including individuals and hence we are not in agreement with the contentions of the learned advocate in this regard. Insofar as the other contentions of the learned advocate that the work order was in a nature of composite contract for both removal and transportation of iron ore and ore burden at specified rates and hence the same would qualify, as understood by the assessee, as cargo handling service. This contention cannot also be accepted. Firstly, for the reason, the predominant service is in relation to the transportation. In this regard, the reliance placed by the authorities in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is ancillary service provided for successful completion of the main service. The cost of transportation charge is Rs. 29.60 per ton of lime stone quantity delivered to the crusher out of which the labour element is only Rs. 2.96 per ton. It is apparent that the essential feature of the service is transportation. Loading and unloading are ancillary/intermediate service provided in relation to transportation of goods, and such service would be Goods and Transport Agency Service. It cannot be 'Cargo Handling service' as was found by the Commissioner. 4.4. In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned Commissioner(Appeals) and hence we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. Insofar as Revenue's appeal i....