TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 649
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ying out activities of salt loosening, salt loading and handling at the salt panes of M/s TATA Chemicals. The Appellant have started paying service tax since 2010. For the period upto 31.03.2011, the Appellants had paid service tax on the total value of the services received as per Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1944. From 01.04.2011 onwards, the Appellant started paying service tax on the total value of invoices raised as per the provision of the Point of Taxation Rules, 2011. The Appellant have also availed the benefit of Notification No. 01/2009-ST, dated 05.01.2009 which provided full exemption from payment of service tax in respect of certain specified taxable services when they are provided to goods transport agency for providing tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvice tax of Rs. 62,52,461/- only computed on the amounts actually received, as reflected in their ST-3 returns. Therefore, the Appellants had short paid service tax by Rs. 4,34,241/-. Though, the Appellants during investigation have paid service tax of Rs. 46,69,199/- vide challan dated 29.12.2012, under protest but they are of the strong view that they are not liable to pay service tax and entire demand of service tax is liable to be set aside. In the above circumstances, Show Cause Notice dated 01.04.2013 was issued alleging that the Appellants were supposed to pay service tax on the Manpower Supply Service provided to GTA service provider during the period from October 2007 and March 2009 amounting to Rs. 42,34,958/-. It was also allege....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n-compliance of the condition of the Notification and as regard the demand of Rs. 4,34,241/- remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for verifying the fact about the actual calculation of service tax on the ground that the details of taxable services provided in payment received for rendering such services by the appellant during financial year 2009-2010 to 2010-2011 are not available on records with this office. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order-in-appeal, the appellant filed the present appeal. 2. Shri Jigar Shah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as regard the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 42,34,958/- on the manpower recruitment or supply agency service provided to GTA service pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a Tyres Ltd. vs CCE 1999 (108) ELT 361 (T) • CCE vs Advantage media Consultant 2008 (3) TMI 59 -CESTAT • GD Goenka Pvt Ltd. 2023 (8) TMI 995-CESTAT • Gopal Zarda Udyog 2005 (188) ELT 251 (SC) • Lubri Chem Industries Ltd. 1994 (73) ELT 257 (SC) 2.1 As regard the remaining demand of Rs. 4,34,241/- on cargo handling service, it is his submission that this service tax is relating to the amount of service provided before levy of service tax i.e. prior to 01.04.2011, therefore, the same is not taxable. 3. Shri P. Ganesan, learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by bot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....transport agency and also the name and date of the consignment note, by whatever name called, issued in his behalf." The above notification was given retrospective effect in the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2009 which is reproduced below: "(H) (1) The notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. G.S.R. 10(E), dated the 5th January, 2009, issued in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 93 of the Finance Act, 1994, granting exemption from the whole of service tax leviable under section 66 to any person providing specified taxable services to goods transport agency, shall be deemed to have, and to always have, for all purposes, validly come into force on and from th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....October 2007 to March 2009. The retrospective amendment came into effect only on 19.08.2009, whereby the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2009 was given assent by the President of India. Before that the exemption notification No. 01/2009 was not available to the assessee, therefore, presuming to comply with the condition of Notification No. 01/2009 cannot be expected from the assessee. Therefore, the appellant have not mentioned the name and date of the consignment note in their invoice issued to their service recipient who is undisputedly GTA service provider. However to extend the benefit of such notification even though the procedural lapse can be ignored, but the fact that the service provided by the appellant to the GTA service provider which h....