TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd. is a transporter / transport contractor and undertakes the transport of goods by road. They are also registered for providing transport agency service. On intelligence, it was noticed by the officers of Divisional Preventive Unit, Tuticorin that the appellant has provided GTA services to M/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. during the period from 1.6.2006 to 16.8.2006. The service recipient, M/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., had availed the services of transportation of goods from Tuticorin to Silvasa. During investigation, statement of the Branch Manager Shri K. Subramaniam was recorded on 25.6.2009. Further details of the transportation were obtained vide letter of appellant dated 2.3.2009. It was revealed that the goods on be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... behalf of the appellant. It is submitted that the appellant is engaged in providing goods transport service to various companies for transport of their consignment from one location to another. They have their own fleet of trucks and hire in case of requirements. The appellant was providing such transportation services to M/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin for transportation of copper anode from Tuticorin to Silvasa by road. During the period June 2006 to August 2006, due to unavailability of lorries, the appellant had transported the said goods by using the facility of Railways. For this purpose, the appellant had availed services of transportation of goods by rail by Container Corporation of India. But for a limited number ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....portation of goods by rail. The appellant has collected only freight charges as applicable for road transportation of goods. Further, on such freight charges, the consignor namely M/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. has paid the service tax which is not disputed by the department. Wherever the goods are transported by rail, the appellant had availed the services of Container Corporation of India who collected the railway freight from the appellant. Appropriate service tax for such railway freight was also paid. Under such circumstances demand of service tax again on the freight charges alleging that the appellant has undertaken transportation of goods by rail is not sustainable. 5. Without prejudice to the above submission, it is also ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... charges only for transportation of goods by road from the service recipient. They had to opt for transportation of goods by rail due to unforeseen circumstances such as unavailability of lorries. The intention between the parties, namely service recipient and service provider, was not to provide transportation of goods by rail. From the invoices issued by the appellant to the service recipient namely M/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., it is seen that the appellant has collected only freight charges for transportation by road as agreed between the parties. It is also seen mentioned in the invoices that the service tax is payable by consignor. Undisputedly, the consignor, namely, M/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. has discharged the s....