TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 67
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appellant demanding Service Tax of Rs.2,74,74,311/- and Education Cess of Rs.1,76,420/- on various taxable services provided and received by them during the period 1990-2000 to 2006-07. The Notice was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 31.03.2009, wherein the demand of Rs 2,74,46,799/- was dropped and balance demand was confirmed . Aggrieved against the impugned order, the department has filed the present appeal. 2. In their Grounds of Appeal, the department raised the following points: (i) The Adjudicating Authority has observed that the declarations from the Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service provider as submitted by the Respondent were valid documents for the purpose of availment of Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vided and received by them viz. handling, loading, unloading, warehousing, freight etc. In other words, the Respondent was liable to pay Service Tax on the various services provided by them to their clients. But, the Adjudicating Authority has dropped the demand of Service Tax and Education Cess leviable on such various services on the ground that Service Tax cannot be charged on such services under the category or Clearing & Forwarding Agent's service. In doing so, the Adjudicating Authority has not made any observation to the effect that the contracts entered into between the Respondent and their client(s) have been examined in deciding the excludability of various expenses incurred by the Respondent from the gross taxable amount. 3. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titute taxable value for Transportation of Goods by Road service. Only the commission / service charges, earned for rendering services as C&F Agent, will constitute taxable value and there is no legal basis to include other charges in the taxable value for arriving at Service Tax liability as CFA. WeAgree with the findings of the adjudicating authority. The department has not furnished any evidence to ahow which part of the amount was not included in the taxable value by the Respondent. Thus, we hold that the objection raised by the department in this regard is not sustainable. (ii)Demand of Rs. 1,52,25,526/- (Service Tax) and Rs. 1725,231/ (Education Cess): The amount has been demanded on the basis of consolidated rate an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contention that calculation was made by applying consolidated rates to the whole quantity of cement sold from Dharamnagr as well as Agartala. They also contended that freight charged separately was not chargeable to Service Tax under CFA. More so, GTA service was brought under Service Tax net w.e.f. 01.01.2005. Consequently the demand of Service Tax of Rs. 39,43,758/- and Education Cess of Rs. 35,290/- not sustainable. In view of our observations at (ii) above, we agree with the findings of the adjudicating authority, as the demand has been made on similar grounds.. (iv) Demand of Service Tax of Rs. 59,425/-: The show cause Notice has proposed to charge the above amount as Service Tax on the 'Profit of Sale', treating the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd as such said amount was confirmed. (vii) Demand of Service Tax of Rs. 1,764/- and Education Cess of Rs. 35/-: The same relates to short payment for the period April '06 to September '06 as per taxable value shown in the ST-3 returns vis-à-vis the payments made. In the wake of no contest from the notice the amounts stand confirmed. (viii) Cenvat credit of Rs. 75,577/- and Rs. 9,751/-: The Respondent allegedly availed excess credit of Rs. 75,577/-. But no details of amount of credit were given in the Show Cause Notice and the Respondent also contended that Department did not consider the amount of Service Tax paid by them under GTA Service under TR-6 Challans and for which no Invoice was issued ag....